Top News

Andrew Hugg, a senior US military official reportedly responsible for nuclear and chemical safety, has been placed on administrative leave after a video surfaced online allegedly showing him sharing sensitive information.

Responding to the controversy, the US Army said it has launched an investigation and confirmed that Hugg has been removed from duty pending a detailed investigation into the matter.

A spokesperson stated that Hugg has been placed on administrative leave while authorities examine the authenticity of the video and the seriousness of the allegations

In a statement, spokesperson Cynthia O. Smith said, “We have placed Mr Hugg on administrative leave while we conduct a thorough investigation into this matter.”

According to reports, Hugg served as a chief of chemical nuclear surety, a role believed to involve oversight of nuclear operations and chemical safety within the US military framework.

He was reportedly associated with the US Department of the Army, and his expertise included nuclear operations and safety protocols, and a LinkedIn profile believed to belong to him has since been taken down.

US Nuclear ‘Chief’ Andrew Hugg 'Shares' Sensitive Intel

The controversy began after a covertly recorded video, shared online by activist James O'Keefe, allegedly showed Hugg speaking freely about sensitive national security matters during a conversation with a stranger.

In the footage, he is purportedly heard discussing US military operations, nuclear decision-making processes, and broader strategic issues.

According to claims made alongside the video, Hugg allegedly:

• Spoke about US airstrikes in Iran, suggesting civilian casualties described as “collateral damage”
• Commented on internal nuclear policy, stating the US has no plans to deploy nuclear weapons in ongoing conflicts
• Made remarks about potential action against Iranian leadership
• Referenced the existence of chemical nerve agents and an alleged exposure incident involving a US Army chemist

These claims have not been independently verified, and the full context of the conversation remains unclear.