As the Trump administration clashes with AI firm Anthropic over restrictions on its Claude model’s use for military applications, the company has turned to Beacon Global Strategies (BGS), a strategic advisory firm with deep ties to Democrat national security figures and Obama operatives, including the “51 spies who lied”, who signed or promoted the infamous 2020 letter that downplayed the Hunter Biden laptop by deceptively labeling it potential “Russian disinformation” at the height of the 2020 Presidential election.
The move by Anthropic should raise alarm bells among Trump administration officials, as it is an attempt to bypass the current administration by mobilizing a network of former Obama and Biden officials to pressure the Department of War, and it is now even more undeniable that Anthropic is advancing a partisan agenda under the guise of “AI safety.” This strategy not only politicizes a critical national security technology but also reveals deeper patterns of ideological resistance to the Trump administration’s push for unrestricted military AI adoption.
The dispute stems from Anthropic’s refusal to grant the Pentagon unrestricted access to its AI for “all lawful purposes,” including certain surveillance and lethal autonomous weapons applications that the company has sought to limit on their leftist ideological grounds. The Trump administration, including Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, responded by directing federal agencies to cease use of Anthropic technology and designating the firm a national security supply chain risk, a step Anthropic has challenged in court. In February, President Trump took to Truth Social with a scathing post, writing:
“THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WILL NEVER ALLOW A RADICAL LEFT, WOKE COMPANY TO DICTATE HOW OUR GREAT MILITARY FIGHTS AND WINS WARS! That decision belongs to YOUR COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF, and the tremendous leaders I appoint to run our Military. The Leftwing nut jobs at Anthropic have made a DISASTROUS MISTAKE trying to STRONG-ARM the Department of War, and force them to obey their Terms of Service instead of our Constitution. Their selfishness is putting AMERICAN LIVES at risk, our Troops in danger, and our National Security in JEOPARDY.
Therefore, I am directing EVERY Federal Agency in the United States Government to IMMEDIATELY CEASE all use of Anthropic’s technology. We don’t need it, we don’t want it, and will not do business with them again! There will be a Six Month phase out period for Agencies like the Department of War who are using Anthropic’s products, at various levels. Anthropic better get their act together, and be helpful during this phase out period, or I will use the Full Power of the Presidency to make them comply, with major civil and criminal consequences to follow.
WE will decide the fate of our Country — NOT some out-of-control, Radical Left AI company run by people who have no idea what the real World is all about. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP”
The Anthropic-DoW feud escalated in early 2026 after the Pentagon sought broader access to Claude for initiatives like GenAI.mil, while the company drew lines against certain uses. Anthropic has sued, arguing the Trump administration’s actions amount to retaliation and government overreach. A federal judge issued an early ruling blocking some enforcement measures, but the Trump administration has appealed.
Overlap with Prior Anti-Trump, Democrat Presidential Administrations
Anthropic’s own ranks include multiple alumni from the Biden administration in policy and national security roles, such as former National Security Council official Tarun Chhabra and others involved in AI safety initiatives. The firm has also formed an advisory council featuring former senior officials from the Biden and Obama eras. This creates a revolving door that allows holdover influence from the previous administration to undermine Trump’s priorities on “woke AI” and unrestricted military use of advanced models.
Beacon Global Strategies: The ‘Shadowy’ Firm with Clinton/Obama Ties
To navigate the standoff, Anthropic has retained Beacon Global Strategies (BGS), a D.C.-based firm founded in 2013 that advises clients in defense, aerospace, technology, and cybersecurity, including major players like Lockheed Martin, OpenAI, Google, Apple, and AWS. BGS positions itself as a firm to guide its clients through geopolitical risk, export controls, and federal contracting, but it is more of a “revolving door” operation with close ties to Democrat campaigns and Democrat, Deep State political operatives.
Weaponizing Intelligence Credentials for Partisan Political Outcomes
The October 19, 2020, public letter, signed by 51 intelligence officials, which asserted that the New York Post’s reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop bore “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation,” has long been accused of being election interference. Multiple polls at the time indicated that widespread awareness of the laptop’s contents, detailing foreign business dealings involving the Biden family and Hunter Biden’s history of drug use and questionable sexual activities, could have drastically influenced voter behavior in the final weeks of the 2020 Presidential election. After the laptop’s authenticity was later confirmed through forensic analysis and admissions from key figures, the letter faced intense scrutiny.
Four key BGS figures who are central to Anthropic’s advisory efforts played prominent roles and have documented connections to the October 19, 2020 public letter.
These four individuals at BGS include:
• Jeremy Bash, BGS co-founder and managing director, signed the letter as a former senior intelligence official and facilitated follow-up communications with the Biden campaign. He previously served as Chief of Staff to Leon Panetta at the CIA and Pentagon during the administration of Barack Hussein Obama. Bash is also the ex-husband of CNN anchor Dana Bash, who is notoriously anti-Trump and spent years spreading the Russia Collusion hoax on CNN.
• Michael Morell, BGS senior counselor and former Acting CIA Director under the administration of Barack Hussein Obama, was a signatory and reportedly helped organize and draft the letter. He has acknowledged his purpose in signing the letter was to assist the Biden campaign in defeating Donald Trump. He later testified that his motivation included assisting the Biden campaign by providing a debate talking point. Morell explicitly acknowledged the outreach from Biden campaign advisor Antony Blinken (former Biden Secretary of State) as the catalyst.
• Leon Panetta, another BGS senior counselor and the former CIA Director and Secretary of Defense under Obama, also signed the letter.
• Andrew Shapiro, BGS co-founder, did not sign the letter, but he reportedly helped circulate the letter to media outlets, according to reporting and testimony. Congressional investigations, including those by the House Judiciary Committee and Senate Judiciary, highlighted how these former officials invoked their intelligence pedigrees to lend undue credibility to the false claim of Russian interference in the 2020 Presidential election. Trump administration officials and Republican lawmakers have accused these individuals now at BGS of misusing the prestige and implied access associated with their past CIA and national security roles, effectively leveraging residual influence from security clearances and official experience, to shape public opinion in a politically charged moment. On his first day back in office in 2025, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Holding Former Government Officials Accountable For Election Interference And Improper Disclosure Of Sensitive Governmental Information,” revoking security clearances for the 51 signatories known as “spies who lied”. The Executive Order cited concerns over election interference and improper use of sensitive governmental associations and security clearances.
It is worth noting that Bash, Panetta, and Morell have all had their security clearances revoked, which creates another layer of distrust between Anthropic and the Trump administration.
These individuals, all of whom are Democrat political operatives, have also advised the presidential campaigns of Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton on foreign policy. Michael Allen, the firm’s “Republican” co-founder, faced pushback from the first Trump transition, including being sidelined as a “sherpa” for a CIA director nominee due to his involvement in a Liz Cheney fundraiser.
By retaining BGS, Anthropic has effectively outsourced its Washington influence operation to individuals with a documented history of opposing Trump and aligning with Democratic priorities. This move raises questions about whether the company is attempting to recreate a “deep state” echo chamber inside the national security apparatus, using holdovers and revolving-door operatives to pressure the Pentagon from outside the chain of command.
Anthropic’s Exploitation Of The Revolving Door and Biden-Era Holdovers
The political implications extend beyond external lobbying. Anthropic’s internal ranks include prominent alumni from the Biden administration, most notably Tarun Chhabra, Anthropic’s head of national security policy. Chhabra previously served as Deputy Assistant to the President and Coordinator for Technology and National Security on the Biden National Security Council, where he helped shape policies on AI, export controls, and competition with China. In addition to working for Joe Biden, Chhabra also previously worked as Director for Strategic Planning and Director for Human Rights and National Security at the National Security Council during the Obama administration. Chhabra also served as a speechwriter to the Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon under Barack Hussein Obama’s administration from 2013-2015. A review into Chhabra’s background reveals he received a Paul & Daisy Soros Fellowship in 2009 to pursue a JD in Law at Harvard University. Paul Soros is the older brother of Democrat mega donor George Soros. Paul and his wife, Daisy, created their fellowship program to provide scholarships for children of immigrants to pursue higher education and advanced degrees. It has been reported that Chhabra is the person who has been pitching opposition research against President Trump and his administration officials for Anthropic AI as they continue to face fallout from the Trump administration and the Department of War. Anthropic has also assembled an advisory council drawing heavily from Obama and Biden-era officials.
This creates a classic revolving door: former government officials who helped craft the previous administration’s AI governance framework now occupy influential positions at a private company resisting the current administration’s directives. The Trump team, including Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, has framed this as an attempt by “woke AI” advocates to impose progressive ethical constraints that could handicap U.S. forces against adversaries like China, which faces no comparable corporate self-restrictions on military AI development.
Exposing “Woke AI” in Practice
The core dispute underscores broader accusations that Anthropic embodies “woke AI.” The company has refused to grant the Pentagon unrestricted access to its Claude model for “all lawful purposes,” drawing explicit red lines against mass domestic surveillance of Americans and fully autonomous lethal weapons systems. Trump and Hegseth have argued that such corporate-imposed guardrails amount to ideological veto power over military capabilities, potentially creating an asymmetric disadvantage in the great-power competition with America’s adversaries. It is worth noting that every other defense contractor and defense company that engages with the Pentagon is required to follow the same rules imposed upon them by the Department of War.
Anthropic seems to believe their leftist ideology and concept of morality trumps the authority of Secretary of War Hegseth and Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering of the United States Emil Michael, both of whom have expressed frustration at the idea of needing to ask a leftist AI company for permission to use Anthropic’s AI technology in combat, such as against enemy drones.
By turning to operatives accused of past politicization of intelligence, precisely the kind of behavior Trump has vowed to root out, Anthropic reinforces perceptions that its “safety” policies are not neutral risk-management tools, but rather extensions of a left-leaning worldview that prioritizes certain ethical concerns over raw strategic superiority. While Anthropic cites fears of misuse, it has shown willingness to partner with other entities and has benefited from substantial federal contracts in the past. The hiring of BGS and facilitation of letters from figures like Panetta further suggests an effort to mobilize prestige from the prior administration to undermine Trump’s America First approach to defense technology.
In an effort to help Anthropic defeat the supply chain risk designation by the Trump administration, BGS has assisted them by orchestrating an Amicus Brief. On March 9, 2026, a brief was lodged in Anthropic PBC v. United States Department of War (Case 26-1049) by “Former Senior National Security Government Officials,” which includes former CIA Director and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta as a participant.
Despite President Trump recently posting on Truth Social that Barack Hussein Obama should be arrested and charged with treason, Anthropic is attempting to leverage insider networks of Obama holdovers still working inside the Department of War to influence policy debates against the sitting administration.
Whether the Panetta letter and BGS engagement will sway Trump officials remains to be seen, but Anthropic’s strategy is persistent with the revolving door among the political consultant class in Washington’s national security and tech sectors, where past political battles continue to shape battles over America’s AI edge.
Why This Should Matter to the Trump Administration
There are three core concerns with Anthropic enlisting BGS.
1. Anthropic’s leadership and advisory ranks are stocked with former Biden officials who appear actively engaged in resisting the Secretary of War and President Trump’s directives on military AI use.
2. The company has hired BGS, whose principals have a track record of opposing Trump, including through their signing of the 2020 letter that mislabeled Hunter Biden’s as “Russian disinformation” to prevent a damaging story about Joe Biden during the final weeks of the 2020 Presidential campaign.
3. BGS is now facilitating efforts — including the Panetta letter — that frame Anthropic’s position as essential for national security, effectively lobbying against the administration’s push for fewer restrictions on defense applications of AI.
Broader Ramifications for National Security and AI Governance
Politically, the conflict between Anthropic and the Trump administration highlights a persistent tension in Washington’s national security-tech nexus:
- Undermining Executive Authority: Enlisting networks of former officials with histories of opposing the sitting president risks blurring the line between legitimate advocacy and institutional resistance, echoing concerns about holdover influence that fueled Trump’s critiques of the “deep state.”
- Politicization of AI Development: If private firms can effectively lobby against military priorities by activating partisan networks, it sets a precedent that could fragment U.S. AI leadership. China’s state-directed model faces no such internal ideological friction because it is all state-controlled under the banner of the CCP.
- Trust and Accountability: Revelations about the 2020 letter’s origins, tied directly to Biden campaign coordination and former high-level Obama intelligence officials (otherwise known as the Deep State), have damaged public confidence in the intelligence community’s impartiality. Anthropic’s reliance on the same figures who are plagued with scandal amplifies skepticism that its positions stem from objective safety analysis rather than an inherited leftist political bias.
- Legal and Policy Battles: The ongoing lawsuits, with a federal judge issuing a preliminary block on some Trump administration measures, further reveals how these disputes can not only serve as distractions our adversaries can exploit, but they can also be prolonged in court, which allows the Left to buy time and shape destabilizing anti- Trump and anti-Hegseth narratives as the Pentagon seeks alternatives like expanded partnerships with less restrictive providers.
Ultimately, Anthropic’s strategy risks portraying the company not as a neutral innovator but as a hostile actor embedded in the very partisan ecosystem that prioritized political outcomes over transparency and truth in 2020. For the Trump administration, this high-profile dispute serves as a case study in why rooting out ideological constraints and revolving-door influence is essential to ensuring American AI superiority serves national defense, not progressive guardrails or lingering Obama-Biden networks that have yet to be purged from within the Pentagon. Ultimately, the Trump administration and the American people are left to grapple with this fundamental question: Should frontier AI models critical to military superiority and national security be subject to corporate vetoes shaped by political bias, or, must they align unequivocally with the elected government’s lawful priorities in an era of intensifying global competition and increased threats from multi-polar adversaries who seek to US AI to harm the United States?
AI models that seek integration into the Pentagon must serve U.S. national security without corporate ideological or so-called “ethical” guardrails that could handicap the military relative to adversaries like China, Russia, and Iran. By recruiting President Trump’s most aggressive political opponents, Anthropic has chosen a path of resistance, amplified by Obama/Biden-era networks, as an attempt to preserve influence from the prior administration and impose progressive constraints on US defense technology.
