Pulitzer Prize winning American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, known for his decades of reporting on US national security and intelligence affairs has raised fresh questions over President Donald Trump’s possible use of extraordinary emergency powers. Writing on Substack, Hersh examines whether the administration could exploit emergency powers for domestic political gains.

The Continuity of Government Readiness Condition (COGCON) is a United States alert system used to track and manage the readiness and relocation of federal leadership during a catastrophic emergency. He explores the possibility of the little-known COGCON potentially being used amid growing concerns over Republican control of Congress.

The United States’ midterm elections are held biennially, occurring in the halfway of a US President’s 4-year term. It is conducted to elect the House of Representatives and Senators, which is equivalent to India’s Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha election. Seymour Hersh has raised questions over whether US President Donald Trump could exploit extraordinary presidential emergency powers to prevent Democrats from regaining control of the House of Representatives in these upcoming mid-term elections, this November.

In a recent post on his Substack, Hersh examines a little-known mechanism called the Continuity of Government Readiness Condition, also known as COGCON, which he describes as a highly classified component of the broader Presidential Emergency Action Documents (PEADs) framework. Hersh has previously reported on PEADs, which he says provide presidents with sweeping powers during a declared domestic crisis.

Hersh's latest reporting focuses mainly on Joel McCleary, a former security aide to President Jimmy Carter, who drew his attention to this, claiming that COGCON could potentially allow emergency national security mechanisms to be applied in a domestic political context as well. COGCON was modelled on the military's DEFCON warning system and is intended to establish different levels of readiness for continuity of government during a national emergency. According to McCleary, the concern is that mechanisms originally designed to respond to threats such as nuclear attack could potentially be repurposed in response to political unrest or other domestic developments.

Hersh reports McCleary as arguing that the continuity apparatus is particularly concerning because the legal framework does not clearly establish how an emergency shall be defined before extraordinary presidential powers can be activated. McCleary further alleges that White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller has emerged as a central figure in the administration's continuity machinery.

These concerns come against the backdrop of Trump's repeated references to an "enemy from within" and his administration's efforts to target what it considers ‘domestic political extremism’. Hersh also points to a presidential memorandum issued last September on countering domestic terrorism and organised political violence, arguing that its authorities could potentially be used against political opponents as well.

Hersh's argument comes as Republicans face the possibility of losing control of the House in the November elections. He notes that Trump has so far resisted calls from some of his supporters to declare a national emergency and assume sweeping powers over the electoral process. At the same time, Hersh links the political uncertainty to Trump's continuing confrontation with Iran, arguing that the conflict, coupled with difficulties surrounding the Strait of Hormuz and strained relations with Middle Eastern partners could further damage Republican prospects in the upcoming mid-term elections.

The central concern raised by Hersh is therefore not simply whether Trump intends to invoke emergency powers, but whether the existing legal architecture gives a president sufficient latitude to determine what constitutes an emergency and how extraordinary powers should be exercised. Hersh's reporting does not directly establish that Trump is preparing to activate COGCON or use emergency powers to prevent a Democratic victory. Rather, it raises the possibility and points to what he and McCleary describe as a ‘structural vulnerability’ in the US system of checks and balances.

Savio Rodrigues

Savio Rodrigues is a Research Analyst at Escape Velocity MediaWorks Pvt Ltd, where he writes extensively for Chakra Newz on defence, national security, geopolitics and emerging technologies. He holds a Master's degree in International Relations and Strategic Studies from the University of Mumbai and has experience in geopolitical risk analysis, strategic research and international affairs.