GOP congressman confirms Hegseth ordered pause in cyber operations against Russia, despite Pentagon denial
What we know about the U.S. pause on cyber operations against Russia
Washington — Republican Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska said the U.S. government halted cyber operations against Russia for one day in February as President Trump was trying to negotiate an end to the Russia-Ukraine war, confirming CBS News reporting at the time and undercutting statements of denial from the Defense Department.
"I actually dug into this whole matter. I just want to address it: It was a one-day pause, which is typical for negotiations," said Bacon, chair of the House Armed Services cyber subcommittee, during a hearing on Capitol Hill on Friday. "That's just about as much as I can say. It was a one-day pause."
In March, multiple U.S. officials told CBS News that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had issued a directive to U.S. Cyber Command to pause cyber operations against Russia, including those that were the most provocative. At the time, the duration of the pause was unknown.
In response to reports about the pause, the Pentagon's rapid response team posted on March 4 on X that Hegseth "has neither canceled nor delayed any cyber operations directed against malicious Russian targets and there has been no stand-down order whatsoever from that priority."
Two sources familiar with Hegseth's order said the pause directive lacked specificity. It's not clear how the order about planning was interpreted. Multiple officials also told CBS News in March that strategizing for future operations was never paused and that U.S. cyber policy on Russia "is very much intact" and remains at the same level, one of the officials said.
Bacon's remarks are the first on-the-record acknowledgment of the directive's existence, which was first reported in February by The Record, a cybersecurity news publication.
It's not uncommon for certain military operations to be paused during sensitive negotiations between countries. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have halted operations to prevent U.S. intentions from being misconstrued and to keep diplomacy on track.
In addition to the Pentagon's statement on X, the Trump administration stonewalled inquiries on the matter and continued to deny any pause was ordered.
A senior U.S. defense official at the Defense Department declined to answer questions from CBS News at the time when asked about the reported pause.
In Friday's House hearing, the statement from DOD Rapid Response was called out by Army veteran and Democratic Rep. Eugene Vindman, who accused the Pentagon of lying about the pause directive.
"What I would like to do is basically point out that that statement by DOD Rapid Response was an outright lie," said the Virginia congressman. "It was at least misleading. And that is not what the American people deserve, and that will be something that I intend to follow up with the secretary when he actually shows up."
The Pentagon created the DOD Rapid Response account in February, and it is overseen by conservative podcaster and Army veteran Graham Allen, who is now the Pentagon's digital media director.
The account commonly attacks news publications and posts comments criticizing reporting about Hegseth and the Defense Department. The X account has omitted context from its statements, touting an increase in U.S. military recruiting numbers between February 2024 through February 2025, even though much of the period showing improved recruitment numbers occurred during the Biden administration, as CBS News' Confirmed team found.
Trump administration officials have promised to run "the most transparent Defense Department in history," but to date, the Pentagon has held just one formal briefing. Instead of regular press engagements, the Pentagon's modus operandi for official Defense Department communications is often to bypass legacy news media outlets and attack their reporting. Questions to the Pentagon were referred to U.S. Cyber Command, which told CBS News Friday that "due to operational security concerns, we do not comment nor discuss cyber intelligence, plans, or operations."
James LaPorta
James LaPorta is a national security coordinating producer in CBS News' Washington bureau. He is a former U.S. Marine infantryman and veteran of the Afghanistan war.
contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
24 minutes ago
- Forbes
Trump: ‘Don't Feel So Sorry' For Biden Because Of Stage 4 Cancer
President Donald Trump on Friday said not to 'feel so sorry' for former President Joe Biden, who announced a cancer diagnosis earlier this month, and criticized Biden as 'vicious'—just over a week after Trump and other Republicans suggested Biden may have hidden his illness from the public. Biden, who was diagnosed with stage 4 prostate cancer, said his "prognosis is good." Trump, who spoke in the Oval Office on Friday, called Biden a 'somewhat vicious person,' adding, 'If you feel sorry for him, don't feel sorry for him, because he's vicious.' Trump did not clarify why he referred to Biden as vicious, though he did cite 'what [Biden] did with his political opponent and all of the people that he hurt' while arguing Biden had 'hurt a lot of people.' Biden, 82, revealed he had stage 4 prostate cancer earlier this month and told reporters Friday his prognosis is 'good,' and 'the expectation is we're going to be able to beat this.' '[Biden's] been a sort of moderate person over his lifetime,' Trump said. 'Not a smart person, but a somewhat vicious person, I will say. If you feel sorry for him, don't feel so sorry, because he's vicious. What he did with his political opponent and all of the people that he hurt—he hurt a lot of people, Biden, so I really don't feel sorry for him.' This is a developing story.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Behemoth Golden Dome may face lackluster scrutiny in Trump's Pentagon
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's decision this week to cut more than half of the Pentagon's test and evaluation office personnel was driven, in part, by concerns over the office's plans to provide testing oversight for the Trump administration's $175 billion Golden Dome missile defense project, multiple sources told Defense News. In a memo released Wednesday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced plans to restructure the Office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, known as DOT&E, and reduce its 94-person staff to 46 — a mix of civilians, military personnel and one senior executive. The memo also put an end to all contractor support to the office. The decision sparked concerns from some congressional Democrats, including Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Jack Reed, D-RI, who called the move 'reckless and damaging.' 'With staffing reduced to a skeleton crew and limited contractor backing, DOT&E may be unable to provide adequate oversight for critical military programs, risking operational readiness and taxpayer dollars,' Reed said in a statement. 'This kind of politically motivated interference undermines independent oversight and leaves warfighters and the public more vulnerable to untested, potentially flawed systems.' Hegseth said the reorganization is tied to the Pentagon's 'America First' strategy and was backed by an internal review that identified 'redundant, non-statutory functions' within the office. The analysis, he said, found that reducing personnel could save more than $300 million per year. But multiple sources familiar with the decision and granted anonymity to speak freely told Defense News the circumstances are more complicated than the scenario the secretary described in his memo. They pointed to perennial tensions between the military services and the office, stoked in recent months by an atmosphere of touting quick, programmatic successes that is antithetical to the exacting mission of verifying performance claims over time and under varying conditions. The sources also cited senior leadership's frustration with DOT&E's recent decision to add Golden Dome to its 'oversight list' as being the final provocation. 'It's a perfect storm,' one source said. The DOT&E office was created by Congress to provide independent oversight of major defense acquisition programs. Its leaders are required by law to approve testing plans and report results for all Defense Department programs whose total research and development cost exceeds $525 million —in 2020 dollars — or whose procurement is expected to cost more than $3 billion. The list of efforts under DOT&E oversight currently features over 250 programs, including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Army's Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon and the Navy's Aegis modernization program. The office's role as an overseer means its recommendations are sometimes unpopular with military service leaders and major defense contractors alike. But the aim of its rigorous, and often arduous, validation is to prevent the department from fielding faulty systems that could put service members in harm's way. Golden Dome's cost — estimated at $175 billion over the next three years — and its complexity make it a clear candidate for DOT&E oversight, the sources said. The process for initiating DOT&E oversight of a program is fairly straightforward, but when DOT&E's Acting Director Raymond O'Toole notified senior leaders in a recent memo that he planned to add Golden Dome to the list, the decision drew an unusual level of scrutiny. Officials worried the office's involvement would slow the program down and drive up its cost. They eventually elevated their concerns to the White House. That extra attention appears linked to President Donald Trump's interest in the program, one source said, noting the office was told the program 'needed to be successful for Mr. Trump.' Golden Dome became the president's signature defense project early in his second term. In a Jan. 27 memo, he directed the Pentagon to draft a plan for a layered network of ground-and space-based interceptors and sensors to detect, track and defeat a range of missile threats. Initially calling the project 'Iron Dome for America' after Israel's missile defense system of the same name, Trump rebranded it to 'Golden Dome' — a nod to his vision for a 'golden age in America' and perhaps his own penchant for the precious metal. In an Oval Office meeting last week, flanked by Hegseth and a top Space Force general — as well as multiple images depicting a map of the U.S. covered in gold — Trump said the Pentagon would deliver 'the best system ever built' before the end of his term. While there is wide agreement among defense officials and outside experts that the U.S. needs a more focused investment in its missile defense architecture, Trump's schedule and cost projections have raised eyebrows. With actual details on the project still slim, some have questioned whether Golden Dome's biggest technological lifts are feasible and worth the long-term cost. 'I don't think we should read much into the $175 billion figure because no details or caveats were provided,' said Todd Harrison, an analyst at the American Enterprise Institute. 'I want to see something on paper that shows what's included, what's not included, and the time frame of the estimate.' This week's DOT&E cuts likely mean the office will be under-resourced to oversee all of the Defense Department's major programs, let alone Golden Dome. One source familiar with the office speculated the 'drastically reduced' staff could allow the Pentagon to get away with slimming down the office's oversight list. Reduced testing oversight could allow Golden Dome to move faster, but sources said it would be concerning for a program with such high-stakes ambitions to escape scrutiny. 'It would be hundreds of warheads coming in with all kinds of countermeasures, cyber attacks,' another source said. 'That's usually beyond the scope of a program and a service test office to be able to orchestrate all that.'
E&E News
26 minutes ago
- E&E News
Former EPA lawyer lands at law firm
A former senior EPA enforcement adviser is joining the environmental practice at the law firm Crowell & Moring. Stacey Geis, former deputy assistant administrator at EPA, has joined the firm's environment, energy and natural resources and white collar and regulatory enforcement groups as senior counsel in the San Francisco office. Geis recently served at EPA headquarters as a senior adviser, then as a deputy assistant administrator. The firm says that during her tenure, Geis helped lead the 2,800-person enforcement and compliance assurance office, addressing climate change, PFAS (also known as 'forever chemicals'), and the revitalization of EPA's enforcement and compliance programs. Advertisement Geis also implemented two recent Supreme Court decisions: Sackett v. EPA, which limited the definition of wetlands under the Clean Water Act, and SEC v. Jarkesy, which limited the scope of federal administrative proceedings.
