White House in Turmoil as Hegseth Inquiry Uncovers False Wiretap Claims and Erodes Trust

The White House has been shaken by revelations stemming from an ongoing investigation led by Pete Hegseth into a major Pentagon leak, a probe that has dramatically unraveled confidence within Trump’s inner circle.

Central to the controversy is a startling claim that the National Security Agency (NSA) had illegally wiretapped phones without a warrant, a claim that has since been discredited but not before sowing deep mistrust between the White House and the Pentagon.

This investigation, which led to the dismissal of three top aides last month, now stands on shaky ground as advisers question the legitimacy of the evidence and the motives behind the probe.

This extraordinary episode came to light as Trump advisers were informed that an illegal, warrantless NSA wiretap supposedly exposed the aides who were fired.

The advisers, however, quickly recognized the constitutional and political implications of such a wiretap, understanding it would represent a far more serious scandal than the leaks themselves.

Their alarm only grew when they realized the wiretap claim was unfounded, and that they had been receiving questionable information from Hegseth’s personal lawyer, Tim Parlatore, who was responsible for overseeing the investigation.

The advisers shared their concerns with associates close to Vice President JD Vance, further amplifying the sense of unease.

The investigation centers on the leak of a classified document detailing U.S. military options to reclaim control of the Panama Canal, a secret plan that was allegedly passed to a reporter.

Initially, suspicion fell on Dan Caldwell, a senior adviser to Hegseth. Caldwell was swiftly escorted out of the Pentagon and dismissed alongside two other aides: Darin Selnick, Hegseth’s former deputy chief of staff, and Colin Carroll, the chief of staff to the deputy defense secretary.

Despite their dismissal, Caldwell and the others have maintained their innocence, denying any involvement in leaking the sensitive document.

The implausible wiretap story, coupled with Caldwell’s denials, caused a rift in trust between the Pentagon and the White House.

Trump advisers tracking the investigation have privately expressed confusion and skepticism about the investigation’s direction and the reliability of the information being presented. 

One adviser even told Hegseth that they doubted Caldwell or the other aides were responsible for the leak, instead suspecting the probe was used as a tool to remove staff embroiled in internal conflicts with Hegseth’s first chief of staff, Joe Kasper.

This atmosphere of mistrust intensifies the pressure on Hegseth as he prepares to testify at a Senate hearing next month. The leak investigation, which has dragged on for nearly a month, has produced no new evidence and has yet to be referred to the FBI.

The resulting fallout has left Hegseth’s office without a chief or deputy chief of staff, relying heavily on six senior advisers to manage the operations of the Department of Defense front office.

This office plays a crucial role in directing a department with a budget approaching one trillion dollars and overseeing over two million military personnel.

While Ricky Buria, Hegseth’s former junior military aide, has effectively stepped into the chief of staff role, the White House has blocked Hegseth’s attempt to appoint him permanently.

Concerns about Buria’s limited experience and his involvement in the internal drama surrounding the leak investigation have made him an unsuitable candidate for the position in the eyes of White House officials.

The Pentagon declined to comment on the situation, while a White House spokesperson issued a statement reaffirming President Trump’s confidence in Secretary of Defense’s leadership to restore military readiness and excellence.

“President Trump is confident in the secretary’s ability to ensure top leadership at the Department of Defense shares their focus on restoring a military that is focused on readiness, lethality, and excellence,” the statement read.

The skepticism permeating the White House is believed to have emerged from a series of developments following the suspensions of Caldwell and Selnick on April 15, and Carroll on April 16. All three were fired on April 18 and promptly issued a joint statement denying any wrongdoing.

In the initial White House briefing following their termination, a small group of advisers were told that Caldwell had allegedly printed a top secret document regarding U.S. military plans for the Panama Canal, photographed it, and transmitted the image to a reporter using his personal phone.

However, over the ensuing weeks, doubts about this narrative mounted as Caldwell appeared on a podcast hosted by former Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson.

There, he described the firings as politically motivated within Pentagon office politics and claimed the investigation was being weaponized against him and his colleagues.

Further complicating matters was a rumor circulating within the Pentagon that the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI), which had been working the case for weeks, may have identified the leaked document because it was a draft missing some final details present in the completed version.

According to this rumor, the OSI had been focused on mid-level aides connected to U.S. Southern Command, Central Command, or the Joint Chiefs of Staff, rather than targeting the three aides who were fired.

Notably, the OSI only began focusing on the activities of Caldwell, Selnick, and Carroll after they were already dismissed.

This murky timeline and lack of clarity about the investigation’s targets contributed to the White House pressing Parlatore for concrete evidence against Caldwell and an explanation of how the Pentagon had knowledge of the contents on Caldwell’s phone.

Initially, Parlatore resisted these inquiries, cautioning that it was inappropriate for the executive branch to interfere in an ongoing criminal investigation that could potentially result in charges.

However, by late April, according to information shared by Trump advisers, Parlatore suggested that Caldwell’s phone had been subjected to a warrantless wiretap.

When confronted by associates, Parlatore denied making such a claim, consistently stating that he was only passing on information provided to him by others. Attempts to obtain clarifications from Parlatore were redirected to the Pentagon’s press office.

The Trump advisers, already unsettled by the wiretap insinuations, also voiced concerns about Parlatore’s impartiality, noting his close ties to Kasper, Hegseth’s former chief of staff. They worried the investigation was being manipulated to target Kasper’s perceived adversaries within the office.

The controversy surrounding the alleged warrantless wiretap remains unresolved. Control of the investigation was transferred to the office of Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg around the time Parlatore planned to withdraw to focus on a trial for another client, Navy Admiral Robert Burke, who faces federal bribery charges.

Despite Parlatore stepping back, he remains a close confidant of Hegseth and retains influence over the investigation, able to make recommendations. His commission as a Navy Reserve commander subjects him to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which prevents direct dismissal.

This tangled investigation has laid bare the fractured relations within the Trump defense team and the Pentagon, exposing deep internal conflicts and opaque processes.

The failure to uncover decisive evidence or to progress the case to the FBI reflects the investigation’s stalled status and raises questions about its true purpose.

Meanwhile, Hegseth’s leadership of a critical military office remains compromised, with limited support and growing scrutiny from both political and military stakeholders.

The White House now faces significant challenges in restoring trust and stability within the Department of Defense’s senior leadership. The looming Senate hearing and ongoing public scrutiny threaten to exacerbate the turmoil.

As the Pentagon leak saga unfolds, it highlights the dangerous intersection of internal political rivalries, flawed investigations, and the fragile balance of power within the U.S. military establishment.

In the meantime, the dismissed aides continue to assert their innocence, while Trump’s advisers grapple with understanding the reality of the investigation’s findings.

The rumor of an unconstitutional NSA wiretap, though false, has already inflicted damage, deepening divisions and shaking confidence at the highest levels. The outcome of the investigation, and the repercussions for Hegseth and his office, remain uncertain as the department navigates this unprecedented crisis.