Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) has suddenly become worried about exhausted American sailors. He and every Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee are demanding answers over conditions aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, citing food and water shortages, broken plumbing, mental health problems, and an extraordinarily long deployment.
From Blumenthal's press release:
We write regarding the deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln and mounting evidence that conditions aboard the carrier have deteriorated to the point that the safety and wellbeing of its crew could be compromised. These are deeply troubling reports, and the American people deserve honest answers.
The USS Lincoln departed San Diego on November 21, 2025. The ship has now been deployed for more than 250 days, including over 200 consecutive days without a port call, setting a modern-day record for continuous time at sea for a U.S. aircraft carrier. Family members of the sailors and Marines serving aboard have received urgent messages describing conditions that should alarm you, and everyone serving in a position of leadership at the Pentagon, to include concerns about exhaustion, food and water shortages, and mental health crises serious enough that multiple sailors reportedly attempted to go overboard.
In response to these reports, you publicly stated that the conditions aboard the carrier have been “completely misrepresented.” Even more galling, when asked by reporters about the conditions on the Lincoln, President Trump dismissed the concerns of the families and stated that the Lincoln had not been deployed “nearly long enough.”
Our sailors and Marines signed up to serve and to be treated with respect. They did not sign up to be kept at sea indefinitely with no announced return date and, by multiple accounts, without reliable food, hot water, or working plumbing. That is not how we treat the men and women we ask to carry out this mission.
Sailors deserve answers when conditions go bad, but they also deserve better than becoming political ammunition.
Acting Secretary of the Navy Hung Cao doesn't pretend the deployment has been easy. The Lincoln spent 266 days deployed, including 200 days in a combat zone, while flying more than 10,000 sorties.
The Lincoln was extended because the mission demanded it. Deployments are hard. Combat operations make them harder. War is hell and normal routines are disrupted. One of the hardest aspects about warfighting beyond knowingly placing our service members in harm’s way is that even with the best planning and communication, change and uncertainty will always be in play. Our success depends on how we adapt.
Sailors and Marines are expected to dig deep—and they always do. A leader’s responsibility is to take care of their people the best they can while balancing mission requirements. During this deployment we have seen both: the job is getting done and our leaders are taking care of their people.
Unfortunately, the media are trying to paint our warriors as victims. Not only is that dishonest but it takes away the focus on the enemy and the threat it poses against our nation, people, and way of life.
Here is the truth—
266 days deployed.
200 days in a combat zone.
10,000+ sorties.
1.5M lbs. of ordnance dropped.
And retention rates on the ABE are amongst the highest of all carriers.
It is also true—
A small number of mental health cases were treated with no loss of life.
Meal plans were adjusted when fresh resupply was unavailable, without a single meal being missed.
Calls home were limited when the operational threat was too high.
The carrier is returning home as part of a planned rotation.
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth says accounts of conditions aboard the ship have been badly distorted. Nobody needs to dismiss exhaustion, plumbing failures, supply problems, or mental health concerns to notice what Democrats did next.
Their letter quickly moved past sailors' welfare and blamed President Donald Trump and Hegseth for poor planning and the war itself. Concern for sailors became an indictment of Trump almost immediately.
We've seen this routine before. In 2018, "Saigon" Blumenthal led senators accusing Trump of turning troops sent to the southern border into political pawns.
We are deeply disturbed by the overt politicization of the military and the lack of evidence to justify the deployment of active duty troops to confront the migrant caravan before the midterm elections. This politically-motivated mission misuses active duty servicemembers and wastes Department of Defense (DOD) resources, both of which could compromise military readiness in the face of a true national security threat and heighten the risk of a confrontation between asylum-seekers and armed servicemembers. We request a NORTHCOM briefing and written justification for deploying up to 15,000 active duty troops to the border. In the absence of such justification, we urge you to curb the unprecedented escalation of DOD involvement in immigration enforcement and end unnecessary deployments to support Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) activities.
On October 29, 2018, NORTHCOM issued an inflammatory fragmentary order (FRAGO) that exaggerated the migrant threat and contradicted intelligence assessments reported to have been released the same day. The FRAGO asserted: “the security of the United States is imperiled by a drastic surge of illegal drugs, dangerous gang activity and extension illegal immigration threatens the safety of citizens and undermines the rule of law.” But, according to press reports, a NORTHCOM assessment emphasized that the number of migrants arriving at the border is likely to decrease as the caravan approaches the United States, and that DOD does not anticipate terrorist infiltration or significant criminal gang involvement. Rather than a drastic surge in illegal activity, the reported assessments and historical trends indicate a potential humanitarian crisis instead. Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) emphasized that over 270 migrants have criminal histories, but an anonymous senior Defense Department official was quoted in the press acknowledging that the Department has yet to receive confirmation of these claims.
Although the incendiary FRAGO language is clearly inconsistent with the reported security conditions and intelligence assessments, active duty troops established vehicle convoys and tent cities to provide the same logistical, clerical, and support jobs that National Guard units deployed to the border already perform. It is unclear why thousands of active duty troops are needed to provide additional logistical support to process a dwindling caravan of asylum seekers, particularly given that the troops deployed are likely to substantially outnumber the incoming migrants. There is also a clear lack of proof to support assertions that American national security is imperiled by these asylum-seekers or that current migration patterns represent “a point of crisis.”
Our concerns about this seemingly disproportionate military response to the migrant caravan are amplified by the obvious political agenda at play. Both the deployment timing and mission name reveal a blatant partisan ploy. In response to President Trump’s promise to send “the real military” to secure our borders, approximately 5,200 active duty troops were deployed to support “Operation Faithful Patriot” by November 5, 2018 – the day before the midterm elections. But by November 7, 2018, the Pentagon announced the mission would be re-named “border support” given that “Faithful Patriot” conveyed undeniably political undertones. Such capricious partisanship and manipulation of military troops for electoral gain does a dangerous disservice to our men and women in uniform. Servicemembers must never be used as pawns in a political agenda – a practice that will undoubtedly and irreparably harm servicemember morale.
Then, in 2025, when 6,700 soldiers marched through Washington to celebrate the Army's 250th birthday, Senate Armed Services Committee ranking Democrat Jack Reed (D-R.I.) complained the celebration might become too much about Trump. Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) attacked it as an ego-driven birthday parade.
Recommended: Meet Angie Nixon, the Pebble in the DNC's Shoe
Reed and Duckworth are now among the senators who signed the Lincoln letter. Apparently, American military power looks suspicious when Trump celebrates it, but military hardship becomes sacred ground when Trump can be blamed for it. The consistency lies in the target.
President Trump had already created the President's Military Spouse Commission on Aug. 3, specifically directing it to tackle housing, employment, healthcare, education, child care, and deployment-related burdens on military families. His executive order explicitly recognizes how prolonged deployments strain spouses left running households alone.
Somehow, that part of Trump's record doesn't fit quite as neatly into the new narrative that his administration couldn't care less about military families.
Problems aboard the Lincoln should be looked at and fixed. Tired sailors aren't Republicans or Democrats when they're standing watch thousands of miles from home.
But neither are they props.
Supporting the military should mean standing behind people who serve when the headlines are good, bad, or politically inconvenient.
The Left seems far more eager to salute when the other hand can point accusingly at Donald Trump.
If you appreciate reporting and commentary that refuses to follow the left's approved script, now's a great time to join PJ Media VIP. Get 60% off with promo code FIGHT.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member