Senior enlisted man based in Hawaii will advise Joint Chiefs of Staff
The Pentagon announced Tuesday that Fleet Master Chief David Isom, a seasoned combat veteran, has been selected to serve as the senior enlisted advisor to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or SEAC. He will be the sixth person to take on the position since it was was created in 2005.
Isom enlisted in the Navy in 1987, and after passing SEAL selection went on to serve with the service's most elite special operations units, including Navy Special Warfare Development Group—better known to the general public as SEAL Team Six.
His deployments include the Persian Gulf War, tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and—according to his official bio—several deployments across the Pacific and the Horn of Africa. His military awards include four Bronze Star Medals, including two with 'V ' devices for valor ; two Combat Action Ribbons ; and a Presidential Unit Citation.
Before serving as the senior enlisted man for Indo-Pacific Command he had already been in Hawaii as the senior enlisted leader for Special Operations Command Pacific. In both roles Isom's duties included traveling the region visiting American bases to talk to troops as well as working to bolster ties with foreign service members from other countries and observing training.
At the Pentagon, Isom will replace Marine Sgt. Maj. Troy Black, who is leaving the job after serving as SEAC for two years.
Black previously served as the sergeant major of the Marine Corps before he was selected as the SEAC by Army Gen. Mark Milley and continued on as the senior enlisted advisor to Air Force Gen. C.Q. Brown, whom President Donald Trump controversially fired from the role of chairman in February along with Navy chief Adm. Lisa Franchetti and other officers serving under the Joint Chiefs.
After the firings, Hawaii's U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono charged that 'there is no reasonable justification for these terminations. Instead, the dismissals reveal the President's true intention : installing a group of 'yes men' with fealty to him and not the Constitution or the American people.'
Under Trump and his Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the Pentagon is seeing major shake-ups across the board. Hegseth has vowed to rid the military of 'woke ' officers and civilian personnel, and pledged that there will be a new focus on 'lethality.'
Though considered the most senior enlisted role in the military, the SEAC doesn't actually lead troops as part of the chain of command but serves as an advisor to the military's most senior officer to serve as a voice to the Pentagon's top leadership addressing the issues of enlisted personnel. In this case, Isom will advise Brown's replacement, Air Force Gen. Dan Caine.
Just as Brown's firing was controversial, Trump's appointment of Caine raised eyebrows. Though Caine is a respected officer with extensive experience across the U.S. government, at the time of his nomination he had already retired as a lieutenant general—making him legally ineligible for the role. To make him eligible, Trump had to order that he be both reinstated to active service and promoted to four-star general.
Trump has often told a story of meeting Caine in Iraq during his first presidency, describing him as wearing the iconic red MAGA hat of his supporters and expressing personal admiration and loyalty to Trump—which would have violated several military policies if true. The details of the story often differed and shifted when Trump told it at different venues.
During his Senate confirmation hearing, Caine told lawmakers 'I went back and listened to those tapes, and I think the president was actually talking about somebody else. I've never worn any political merchandise or said anything to that effect.' When Hirono asked him 'if you wore it, would that constitute partisan political activity by a uniformed officer—yes or no ?' Caine answered, 'I think it probably would, yes.'
Caine ultimately was confirmed with 44 Republicans and 16 Democrats voting in favor, though his confirmation was opposed by both Hawaii's Hirono and U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz.
Isom will be the first sailor to serve as SEAC and is leaving Camp Smith for the Pentagon at a time when the military views the Pacific as its top priority theater of operations amid tensions with China. He would bring extensive experience in the region as well as personal knowledge of and relationships with members of foreign militaries that Pentagon leaders are hoping to strengthen alliances with.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump thinks owning a piece of Intel would be a good deal for the US. Here's what to know
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — President Donald Trump wants the U.S. government to own a piece of Intel, less than two weeks after demanding the Silicon Valley pioneer dump the CEO that was hired to turn around the slumping chipmaker. If the goal is realized, the investment would deepen the Trump administration's involvement in the computer industry as the president ramps up the pressure for more U.S. companies to manufacture products domestically instead of relying on overseas suppliers. What's happening? The Trump administration is in talks to secure a 10% stake in Intel in exchange for converting government grants that were pledged to Intel under President Joe Biden. If the deal is completed, the U.S. government would become one of Intel's largest shareholders and blur the traditional lines separating the public sector and private sector in a country that remains the world's largest economy. Why would Trump do this? In his second term, Trump has been leveraging his power to reprogram the operations of major computer chip companies. The administration is requiring Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices, two companies whose chips are helping to power the craze around artificial intelligence, to pay a 15% commission on their sales of chips in China in exchange for export licenses. Trump's interest in Intel is also being driven by his desire to boost chip production in the U.S., which has been a focal point of the trade war that he has been waging throughout the world. By lessening the country's dependence on chips manufactured overseas, the president believes the U.S. will be better positioned to maintain its technological lead on China in the race to create artificial intelligence. Didn't Trump want Intel's CEO to quit? That's what the president said August 7 in an unequivocal post calling for Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan to resign less than five months after the Santa Clara, California, company hired him. The demand was triggered by reports raising national security concerns about Tan's past investments in Chinese tech companies while he was a venture capitalist. But Trump backed off after Tan professed his allegiance to the U.S. in a public letter to Intel employees and went to the White House to meet with the president, who applauded the Intel CEO for having an 'amazing story.' Why would Intel do a deal? The company isn't commenting about the possibility of the U.S. government becoming a major shareholder, but Intel may have little choice because it is currently dealing from a position of weakness. After enjoying decades of growth while its processors powered the personal computer boom, the company fell into a slump after missing the shift to the mobile computing era unleashed by the iPhone's 2007 debut. Intel has fallen even farther behind in recent years during an artificial intelligence craze that has been a boon for Nvidia and AMD. The company lost nearly $19 billion last year and another $3.7 billion in the first six months of this year, prompting Tan to undertake a cost-cutting spree. By the end of this year, Tan expects Intel to have about 75,000 workers, a 25% reduction from the end of last year. Would this deal be unusual? Although rare, it's not unprecedented for the U.S. government to become a significant shareholder in a prominent company. One of the most notable instances occurred during the Great Recession in 2008 when the government injected nearly $50 billion into General Motors in return for a roughly 60% stake in the automaker at a time it was on the verge of bankruptcy. The government ended up with a roughly $10 billion loss after it sold its stock in GM. Would the government run Intel? U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CNBC during a Tuesday interview that the government has no intention of meddling in Intel's business, and will have its hands tied by holding non-voting shares in the company. But some analysts wonder if the Trump administration's financial ties to Intel might prod more companies looking to curry favor with the president to increase their orders for the company's chips. What government grants does Intel receive? Intel was among the biggest beneficiaries of the Biden administration's CHIPS and Science Act, but it hasn't been able to revive its fortunes while falling behind on construction projects spawned by the program. The company has received about $2.2 billion of the $7.8 billion pledged under the incentives program — money that Lutnick derided as a 'giveaway' that would better serve U.S. taxpayers if it's turned into Intel stock. 'We think America should get the benefit of the bargain,' Lutnick told CNBC. 'It's obvious that it's the right move to make.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
USA Today
21 minutes ago
- USA Today
What six wars did Donald Trump end? See the list of conflicts he claims as settled
As President Donald Trump continues to work toward peace between Russia and Ukraine, he is touting a record of settling six wars. "I've settled 6 Wars in 6 months, one of them a possible Nuclear disaster," Trump wrote on Truth Social on Aug. 18, before the meeting with European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House where he made a similar claim. "I know exactly what I'm doing, and I don't need the advice of people who have been working on all of these conflicts for years, and were never able to do a thing to stop them," the social meda comment continued. But did Trump really end six wars in six months? Here is what we know: More: Trump caught on hot mic talking to Macron: 'I think he wants to make a deal for me' Has Trump ended six wars? Since Trump took office, the United States has been involved in five ceasefires or peace agreements, though not all parties involved credit the U.S. for the agreements. Those include: When asked about the sixth war Trump was referring to, the White House also cited Ethiopia and Egypt. However, there has neither been a war or a peace agreement between the countries, according to Axios. Trump dealt with a dispute between the two countries in his first term as they were feuding over a huge hydropowerdam, the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. Egypt and Sudan have expressed concern that water flow to their part of the Nile River would be impacted, USA TODAY previously reported. Trump mentioned the countries in a July meeting with the NATO Secretary General where he rattled off other examples of settling wars. "We worked on Egypt with a next-door neighbor who is a good neighbor," he said. "They're friends of mine, but they happened to build a dam, which closed up water going into a thing called the Nile. I think if I'm Egypt, I want to have water in the Nile and we're working on that." The White House did not answer follow-up questions on how this constitutes a "settled war." More: A Nobel Peace Prize for Trump? World leaders are lining up What happened at the meeting between Zelenskyy and Trump? Zelenskyy's August trip to the White House had far fewer fireworks than the February visit, when he was berated by Trump and Vice President JD Vance. In addition to Zelenskyy, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer also attended the summit on Aug. 18. Zelenskyy, wearing a black suit instead of the military garb that drew comments in February, met with Trump in the Oval Office ahead of the wider group of foreign leaders. He also thanked Trump, something Vance had criticized Zelenskyy of not doing during the previous Oval Office spat. Trump then met with the European leaders in the White House East Room, saying they would know 'in a week or two weeks' if a deal to stop the fighting is possible. After the day of meetings with the European leaders, Trump called Putin to urge him to meet with Zelenskyy. Trump deemed it a step in the right direction. "Everyone is very happy about the possibility of PEACE for Russia/Ukraine. At the conclusion of the meetings, I called President Putin, and began the arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin and President Zelenskyy," he wrote on Truth Social. "After that meeting takes place, we will have a Trilat, which would be the two Presidents, plus myself. Again, this was a very good, early step for a War that has been going on for almost four years." Although the meeting showed strong European unity, it was unclear whether major progress toward peace was made. Trump said the United States would help guarantee Ukraine's security in a deal, but did not clarify the extent of the commitment. He also appeared to dismiss the need for a ceasefire ahead of peace negotiations. Contributing: Joey Garrison, Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy, Bart Jansen, Zac Anderson, Francesca Chambers, Josh Meyer, Kim Hjelmgaard, USA TODAY Kinsey Crowley is the Trump Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at kcrowley@ Follow her on X and TikTok @kinseycrowley or Bluesky at @
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump: ‘Better' if Putin, Zelensky meet without him
President Trump said Tuesday that it would be 'better' if Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met without him first as Trump pushes the leaders to bring an end to the more than three-year-long war in Eastern Europe. The president, who has pushed for a three-way summit with Zelensky and Putin, said he recently had 'very successful' meetings with both leaders, but it would be more beneficial if the two presidents met alone first. 'I thought it would be better if they met without me, just to see. I want to see what goes on. You know, they had a hard relationship, very bad, very bad relationship,' Trump said in an interview on 'The Mark Levin Show.' 'And now we'll see how they do and, if necessary, and it probably would be, but if necessary, I'll go and I'll probably be able to get it close,' he told conservative podcaster Mark Levin. After meeting with Zelensky and seven European leaders at the White House on Monday, Trump said his administration would help broker a meeting between Putin and Zelensky and that soon after, a trilateral meeting including the U.S. president would take place. Zelensky has expressed openness to meeting with Putin, but Russia so far has not committed to such a huddle. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Tuesday that any such meeting should be prepared 'step by step, gradually, starting from the expert level and then going through all the necessary stages.' After Monday's Oval Office meeting, Trump called Putin and the two spoke for about 40 minutes. The conversation came days after the president traveled to Alaska to meet with Putin, their first face-to-face interaction since the first Trump administration, alongside Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff. 'I just want to see what happens at the meeting,' Trump told Levin. 'So they're in the process of setting it up, and we're going to see what happens.'
