The Benny Show - Pete Hegseth Confirmation LIVE Right NOW | Thousands Of Vets March To US Capitol, Trump Speaks, with Guests Sen. Markwaye Mullin, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna and more

Episode Date: January 14, 2025

Pete Hegseth faces confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill, Special Counsel Weiss blasts Biden in final Hunter prosecution report, Senator Markwayne Mullin, Congresswoman Anna Paulina Lunam, former Navy Seal Bill Brown and Tiffany Smiley will join the show. JOIN The Benny Brigade: https://www.bennyjohnson.com/brigade Check Out Our Partners: American Financing: Save with https://www.americanfinancing.net/benny NMLS: 182334, http://www.nmlsconsumeraccess.org Patriot Mobile: Go to https://www.PatriotMobile.com/Benny and get A FREE MONTH Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today is Tuesday, January 14th, 2025. Pete Hegseth, confirmation hearing, live in just seconds away. Ladies and gentlemen, we are less than 20 minutes away. That's 17 minutes approximately. Today, we are going to watch Pete Hegseth. I'm gonna say fight for his life, but he actually knows what that means.

I mean, Pete Hegseth is an Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran. He's somebody who fought and served. He's somebody who's just come back with a squeaky clean FBI background check and report. He's somebody who should sail into the job of secretary of defense, but you know how it works. We talk a lot about the wrap-up smear here. They are going to do everything they possibly can to destroy Pete on the way in. All you need is 50 plus one simple majority to get Pete Hegseth confirmed. Today, there's also going to be some more bombshell hearings on Capitol Hill. We'll be bouncing back and forth. It's going to be a fun day.

We'll have Senator Mark Wayne Mullen on the program. Former Navy SEAL Bill, and Tiffany Smiley will join the show defending Pete Hegseth as veterans pack the halls of Congress. Early this morning in the small hours of the darkness, veterans stormed Capitol Hill, and ladies and gentlemen, there aren't enough seats to get in to support Pete. So we're going to cover all of it live. It's going to be exciting. My name is Benny Johnson, and this is The Benny Show. Make sure that you're starting the year off right. The year is, of course, 2025. The last four years have been abysmal for those of us who've been trying to keep the ship steady.

Prices are obscene and insane. A lot of people go into debt. Every single day, my wife comes home from the grocery store when she goes shopping and slaps her receipt down on the counter. And I can see it for myself. It's great motivation, actually, to do the show. You can see it for yourself. The grocery prices are insane. Prices of everything, ladies and gentlemen. We've got to fix it. Anyway, the point is, is that you should be getting out of debt right now. Use this as your opportunity. American financing can help you access the cash in your home to pay off your interest and debt.

Last year, their salary based mortgage consultants helped customers on average of $800 a month. That's like giving yourself a $10,000 raise. What a way to start the new year and start today. You may be able to delay two mortgage payments. Call American financing today. 888-528-1219. That's 888-528-1219. That's 888-528-1219, americanfinancing.net slash Benny, NMLS 182334, NMLSconsumeraccess.org. Okay.

Ladies and gentlemen, Pete Hegseth is locked and loaded on Capitol Hill. In 15 minutes, the confirmation hearings start inside of the Senate. Let's jump on over to Breitbart for the news here. Pete Hegseth, Trump nominee for Secretary of Defense, critical attest as confirmation hearing is set to be bombshell. Donald Trump is backing Pete Hegseth and doing it muscularly, vocally this morning. President Trump posting on Truth Social his full and total unanimous support for Pete Hegseth. Pete Hegseth will make a great Secretary of Defense. He has my total and complete support. Good luck today, Pete.

Pete Hegseth, Trump's nominee for Secretary of Defense, faces critical test. Ladies and gentlemen, Here we go. Donald Trump's choice for SecDef, Pete Hexeth calls himself a change agent heading into a potentially explosive confirmation hearing on Tuesday. Senators question whether the former combat veteran and TV news show host is fit to lead the U.S. military. Oh, really?

Have you checked in on our current crop of leaders? Have you seen a photo of Darth Vader? Can we get the Darth Vader photo? This is like a vote. Have you seen a photo of Darth Vader? Can we get the Darth Vader photo? This is like a vote. Have you seen the current guy running secretary of defense guys named Lloyd Austin? An important reminder for those of you who enjoy history is that Lloyd Austin was in a coma in the hospital for three days during an active war. I guess you could say America's in multiple active wars right now in Israel and in Ukraine.

We're like effectively fighting proxy wars all over the world. It's a nightmare. It's a real mess. Syria, it's never ending for these people. Lloyd Austin was laid up for months. Lloyd Austin was offline, was literally comatose in the hospital after having a really big surgery. I can't remember what it was that he had.

It was a couple of years ago. Joe Biden didn't know that his own secretary of defense was on his deathbed. Lloyd Austin admits he was unreachable in hospital, blames his staff. Well, that's a very polite headline. Lloyd Austin was in a coma after major surgery and after having what is effectively a life-threatening debilitation. Timeline defense Lloyd Austin's hospitalization and lack of White House notification.

There we go. Hmm, okay. He was hospitalized in intensive care due to complications from an operation without President Joe Biden, cabinet members, or even his deputy knowing. This is the quality of leadership that currently exists at the Department of Defense.

Here you go. Here's your quality of leadership at the quality of leadership that currently exists at the department of defense here you go here's your here's your quality of leadership at the department of defense uh the revelation that defense secretary had prostate cancer surgery and was later hospitalized in intensive care due to complication i think he got sepsis right operation without joe biden cabinet members or even his deputy uh put intense intense spotlight on what his staff knew and when, and when did they inform the civilian leadership? Insane. I mean, you can go through this entire timeline. What you'll find here is that Joe Biden had no clue that his own secretary of defense was on his deathbed. This is the quality of leadership that is currently inside of the Pentagon.

The commander-in-chief had no idea. So here we go, ladies and gentlemen. Not a high bar, let's just say. Not a high bar for woke Darth Vader. Hexeth's former experience as Army National Guard is widely viewed as an asset for the job. He also brings jarring record of past statements and actions, including allegations of sexual assault, excessive drinking, and derisive views with women in military combat roles, woke generals. He vowed to not drink alcohol if he's confirmed to lead the Pentagon.

One of the knocks against Pete Hegseth, other than the typical Kavanaugh stuff that we deal with all the time on this program, and we are the people who believe in free speech on the damn internet it's incredible it really it really is uh remarkable like it really is astonishing the number of people that are willing to turn on a brett kavanaugh right remember all the weak simpy cucks who are like oh kavanaugh they said something bad about Kavanaugh. I gotta pull him, gotta pull him. You might not remember, but Pepperidge Farm remembers. I was here, I was there during the Kavanaugh hearings.

Same thing with Trump. Same thing with Trump. Dude, you like, so weak, feckless, spineless, bitchy. I'm just so, I'm so sick of all you little children wimps this is why we lose it's the same thing, you can go back and I'm not trying to dig up old stuff on John Thune

but you can go back, John Thune, John Cornyn both these guys were in the race for Senate leadership and both of them were calling on Trump to drop out in 2016 oh, gotta drop out Trump said something naughty said a naughty word, said a naughty thing to drop out. Trump said something naughty. Said a naughty word. Said a naughty thing. Got to drop out. Ladies and gentlemen, that's what they wanted. You can find it.

Those tweets are still available. Time for Mike Pence to take over. That's what they said. That's fully available. This is on full display constantly. Trust me, this show knows, are these like weak, feckless, limp-wristed, needle-dick Republicans that will turn on Hegseth. I mean, listen, Hegseth was dead on arrival. The same people. Oh, Pete Hegseth said something naughty. Might have a view that I disagree with. Time to pull him.

Can only have people at Secretary of Defense who are completely controlled by the left who agree with 100% of what never said anything controversial because you know that's like enlisted guys have never said anything controversial go hang out in a war zone, go hang out with a foxhole go hang out with the veterans and see exactly how they joke

to each other why don't you go check in on some of the group chats I'm in a couple group chats with a couple of veterans let me tell you what what Pete Hegs hex is accused of doing like wouldn't even pass the group chat chuckle like laugh emoji in response okay this is just how it works especially when you're warfighters called gallows humor i guess people have forgotten how to have a sense of humor in this country.

And people have also, ladies and gentlemen, forgotten. Well, I mean, there it is. This is like a perfect example. This is why they do the wrap-up smear. Here's John Thune. Donald Trump should withdraw and Mike Pence should be our nominee. Effective immediately. This was sent October 8th, 2016.

There it is. Yeah. That was, of course, when they found a tape of Trump saying something very naughty. Oh, wow. Could you imagine? This man is now,

this man having charged ahead and having standing his ground, this man now has the most powerful political moment and movement in world history, arguably. The freedom movement at his back, the America First movement at his back, and he is standing behind Pete Hegseth. So these are cancellation tactics by the left. We disown them. We disabuse these tactics. And we say with one single voice that we don't play the game.

The game is to try and get us to pull Pete Hicks. Because if they can get you to do it for one person, then these cancellation, deplatforming, mongoloid orcs with their little bot armies will do it for everyone, right? They can get everyone. They can get everyone. They can get Kavanaugh. If they can get Trump, if they can get Hegseth, they'll take them all down,

right? The system works if we allow it to work, if we cower to it and kneel to it like groveling slaves. So we're not going to kneel, ladies and gentlemen. We're going to defend Pete Hegseth as we have done. We're going to use muscularly this program to defend not only free speech, but also good old, good old humor and also a reformed man. Pete Hegseth is a Christian. Let me tell you a little something about the position of this program as I am a Christian and do a little Bible verse at the end of every single show. Let me express something very clearly to you. I'm a sinner and I'm in need of redemption constantly and every single day, including but not limited to my drives to work every morning. I mean, this is like, come on. And that is the approach that I come at

this landscape that we present to you on this program, which is that I'm not going to sit here and hall monitor, sneer and snark and finger wag Pete Hegseth because he did something naughty 10 years ago. His relationship with God is his business. I am required, ladies and gentlemen, as a Christian to be totally and completely humbled

in my own abundance of forgiveness and to let God be the judge. And if you have a problem with cavorting with sinners and breaking bread with sinners, you're gonna have a tough time reading the New Testament, okay? You're gonna have a real tough time in life. So grow up, grow a spine, get a helmet. Life's tough, Reality is brutal. And it's time to unite, ladies and gentlemen, and win. Pete Hegseth is the most endangered of Trump's cabinet choices because of weak Republicans, not because of the left, because of weak Republicans that quiver when the left uses these tactics against them, and they are useful in

missiles. The GOP allies are determined to turn Hegseth into a cause celeb for Trump's governing approach amid national culture wars. Outside groups, including those aligned with the Heritage Foundation, are running a costly campaign to prop up Hegseth's bid. Ladies and gentlemen, let's rock and roll. He will be ripped, he will be demeaned, and he will be talked about, says Senator Tommy Tuberville at an event with former Navy SEALs and Army Special Forces Marine Supporting nominee. We're going to get him across the finish line. Hearing at the Senate Armed Services Committee is going to start a week-long marathon of

senators being scrutinized of Trump cabinet choices. For more than a dozen of the top administrative positions. The Republican led Senate is rushing to have some of Trump's picks ready to be confirmed as soon as inauguration day, despite potential opposition to some from both sides of the aisle. We're going to grind them down. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said on Fox News Channel.

See look at that. Look at this. You even saw this last week when I had a couple senators on. I can't remember who it was. I am one to practice my Christian faith and to say that I will allow John Thune to be a changed man, even though John Thune is up here with tweets constantly praising the January 6th committee, saying Donald Trump needs to drop out because he said naughty things. Oh, no, naughty.

It's amazing. Tucker's up with a podcast, an interview of Billy Bush. Billy Bush talking about exactly how that op worked against Donald Trump and how they sat on these tapes in order to use them and weaponize them. And leak them to individuals that they knew would write the worst possible commentary on it, explode it, try and destroy Donald Trump. It's sick. These people are sick. They're demons.

Don't give in to demons. Have strength, cowards. Ladies and gentlemen, we grant full pardon. What do I? I grant full pardon to John Thune. Everybody needs forgiveness. I need forgiveness. So John Thune, we're gonna just

like pretty much judge you by what you do. It's very important. We're just gonna see how it rolls, right? But it's why I was against John Thune for leader anyway. Hexath faces perhaps the most difficult path to confirmation. He'll be forced to confront allegations of sexual assault, which he has denied, his own comments that are far from military mainstream, though he has support for some veterans groups

and say that his past indiscretions are not part of his focus on improving military readiness and fight. Hegseth will have answers for his comments. Women should straight up not be in combat roles, a view that he softened following meetings with Joni Ernst and Tammy Duckworth. Well, there you go. All right, ladies and gentlemen, we have some breaking news. Hegseth has arrived on Capitol Hill. We have that clip. Let's show it. Pete Hegseth a moment ago arriving with his wife, Jen, walking down the hallway there, heading into a hearing that will begin in about seven minutes time, Dana.

And when it does begin, you're going to hear from Roger Wicker, the chairman from Mississippi. He'll chair it. Jack Reeds, the ranking Democrat on the committee out of Rhode Island. Opening statements from Michael Waltz, opening statements from Norm Coleman, opening statements from Pete Hegseth, which Republican Senator Dan Sullivan told us a moment ago, is a striking statement. And we will want to hear that as we listen together. All right, ladies and gentlemen, you can see him there. We got the art of the surge walking as Tucker's former producer, Justin Wells, with his cameraman right there. There you go.

So it looks like they're going to be doing a full documentary on this. Oh, this is going to be juicy. Let's get to the veterans group before the hearings start. There are thousands of veterans who have stormed Capitol Hill, peacefully, and are there to support Pete Hegseth. Here we go. You're looking now at what we just referred to. The veterans have shown up on their own volition, on their own dime, as usual, because they want everyone to know what Pete being Secretary of Defense would mean. And there's something else that's going to be coming out

shortly, and I don't know why it's not out. Recruiting is going through the roof because they know what it is like having a young man fresh off the battlefield, still putting on the uniform when he is needed stateside and fighting. And he'll finally have a war fighter at the Pentagon. And they want everyone to know what it would mean. Because after Afghanistan, they read for that they ran for the hills. And that is veterans telling their kids, don't join this military. They have changed that rhetoric since Pete's nomination. Ladies and gentlemen, I want to give you a live shot here of Pete Hegseth getting sworn. Let's go. Let's go. Let's pop it up. Pete Hegseth getting sworn in. No audio yet.

Just the photo op here. Ladies and gentlemen, there you go. This is Pete Hegseth getting the cameras, getting the cell phones ready, the room completely stacked with veterans. Very soon, ladies and gentlemen, we will begin very, very soon. Okay, yes, that's right. Here we go. The Committee on Armed Services has convened this hearing to consider the pending nomination of Mr. Pete Hexeth to be Secretary of Defense. I'm going to ask my colleagues and those in the audience to speak. Thank you.

Thank you. The committee on armed services has convened this hearing to consider the pending nomination of Mr. Pete hexeth to be secretary of defense. And at this point, in light of the continued suffering and

death in and around Los Angeles, California, I'm going to ask my colleagues and those in the audience to observe a moment of silence. Amen. Thank you. I also want to take this opportunity to thank my good friend. Amen. Thank you. I also want to take this opportunity to thank my good friend, ranking member Jack Reed. This is my first opportunity to chair this committee in this Congress. I want to thank Senator Reid under his chairmanship. He proved time after time that he cares deeply about national security and about the United States of America, and particularly the men and women who wear the uniform and stand watch

both here and around the world to protect the United States. Senator Reid, I want to thank you for the many courtesies that you have extended to me in the past and I look forward to working with you again in a bipartisan fashion this Congress. It's also appropriate to recognize and welcome three senators attending their very first Senate Armed Service Committee hearing as members. Senator Banks of Indiana, Senator Sheehy of Montana, and Senator Slotkin of Michigan. We are excited to have you as committee colleagues and look forward to many important contributions from each of you.

And Senator Slotkin, as I look down at the end of the dais there, it seems that only a week or two ago I was sitting in that very chair being recognized by the chairman of the committee, the distinguished senator from Michigan. So time flies. Now, let me say this. We had a very appropriate expression of approval by the members of the audience as our nominee and his family walked in. The distinguished ranking member and I sincerely hope that that is the last signal of approval or disapproval in today's hearing. People of the public are here. They're welcome to observe today's hearing um people of the public are here they're welcome to observe today's hearing and um senator reed and i agree though that no disruptions will be allowed audience members may not verbally or physically distract from the hearing to include shouting standing

or raising signage or gestures that block the view of the audience. And we're very serious about this, aren't we, Mr. Reed? And those who do so will be immediately escorted from the room. So, again, welcome to the witnesses, to his friends, and to interested members of the public. If confirmed, Mr. Pete Hegseth would assume the role in a moment of consequence. The United States faces the most dangerous security environment since World War II. We're witnessing the explosive growth and reach of China's hard power.

We're also observing the emergence of an axis of aggressors. That coalition is characterized by broadening and deepening military cooperation among the dictatorships ruling China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Terrorism remains a threat as Israel wages war against Hamas in Hezbollah and as the Assad regime collapses in Syria. America has entered a window of maximum danger and the department needs energetic and focused civilian leadership. Those values begin at the top with the secretary of defense. Many of my distinguished colleagues colleagues have served in a

significant tenure on this committee. And our meetings are fairly long. We should reflect over previous secretaries of defense and their hearings and ask ourselves a simple question. Has the civilian leadership of the Pentagon under the administration of both parties proven up to the challenge? Often the answer has been no.

The civilian leadership has not built the Department of Defense to meet the moment. And this is our moment to correct that. A few examples illustrate how leaders in the past have fallen short. Most of the department's signature programs run years behind schedule and billions of dollars over cost. Vital initiatives have suffered, such as the F-35, the new Sentinel ICBM, and the Navy's shipbuilding program, including the Constellation class frigate. The Department of Defense desperately needs civilian leaders who listen to the advice of combatant commanders, many of whom would benefit from innovative systems. Yet, a risk-averse DOD culture has kept too many promising technologies on the wrong side

of the so-called valley of death. That tenuous period between experimental prototypes and production contracts. Defense companies backed by venture capital receive less than 1% of defense contracts. As we all know, the Pentagon still cannot even pass an audit. The department must simplify and streamline its bureaucracy so it can respond to innovation. Staffs have ballooned. Organizations are top-heavy. Civilian leaders have promised time and again to slim down the bureaucracy and perhaps genuinely hoped to.

Every day, men and women in uniform make tremendous contributions to U.S. security. They and the American people deserve a Pentagon that does the same. Today's Department of Defense is no longer prepared for great power competition. It is not a national defense institution ready to achieve and sustain technological supremacy across the range of operations. Admittedly, this nomination is unconventional. The nominee is unconventional, just like that New York developer who rode down the escalator in 2015 to announce his candidacy for president. That may be what makes Mr. Hegseth an excellent choice to improve this unacceptable status quo that I just described. He is a decorated post-9-11 combat veteran.

He will inject a new warrior ethos into the Pentagon, a spirit that can cascade from the top down. Mr. Hexeth will bring energy and fresh ideas to shake up the bureaucracy. He will focus relentlessly on the warfighter and the military's core missions, deterring wars and winning the ones we must fight.

He will bring a swift end to corrosive distractions such as DEI. Today, many simply acknowledge and live with the systemic problems I have mentioned earlier in acquisition, accountability, technology transition, and organizational civil service reform. Mr. Hexeth will actually move to fix these issues decisively. In short, I'm confident that Mr. Hexeth, supported by a team of experienced top officials, will get the job done. The Secretary of Defense is an incredibly important position, but the Secretary's

span of control is limited. The Pentagon is vast with 3 million plus personnel, uniformed civilian and contractor. A successful secretary understands that steering the ship means focusing his attention on strategic level priorities. The secretary must be supported with exceptional subordinates who will run the day-to-day affairs of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the military services, and the other DOD components. I'm also confident that as an infantryman, Mr. Hegseth understands the military principle of commander's intent. Communicate the clear objective, empower subordinates to use initiative and judgment, and hold everybody accountable. We must not underestimate the importance of having a

top-shelf communicator as Secretary of Defense. Other than the President, no official plays a larger role in telling the men and women in uniform, the Congress and the public about the threats we face and the need for a peace through strength defense policy. I have no doubt Mr. Hegseth will excel in a skill in which many of his predecessors have fallen short. Much has been made of both Mr. Hegseth's personal life and some of his policy pronouncements. Regarding his personal conduct, Mr. Hexeth has admitted to falling short as we all do from time to time. It is noteworthy that the vast majority of the accusations leveled at Mr. Hexeth have come from anonymous sources. Contrast these anonymous accusations with the many public letters of support and commendation.

We have seen letters from people who served with Mr. Hexeth. These individuals have worked with him professionally. They really know him and his character. These patriotic Americans have been willing to put their names and reputations on the line to support Mr. Hexeth. I look forward to sharing these testimonials with the American people. Let me mention one right now. It comes from David Bellavia, who earned the Medal of Honor for heroic actions in combat in Fallujah, Iraq. David Bellavia writes the following. Pete is fearless, unflappable, and confronts conflicts head on.

He's a leader to the core. When Pete is confirmed as the next Secretary of Defense of the United States of America, this country will finally know the privilege of having a true ambassador able to speak on behalf of this generation and its two-decade global war on terror. Washington doesn't build men like Pete. Combat builds men like Pete. As I said, there are more letters expressing the same endorsement. Today we'll hear from the nominee directly.

I want to thank Mr. Hegseth as well as his loved ones for being here today. I look forward to discussing his nomination. I look forward to hearing from Mr. Hegseth about the ways he hopes to rebuild the American strength that secures the peace. And so now I turn to my friend and colleague, Ranking Member Reed, for his opening remarks. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to first congratulate you on your chairmanship. I look forward to continuing our committee's strong tradition of bipartisanship and collaboration. And thank you for your thoughtful and conscientious service to the committee over many years.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'd also like to take a moment to join Chairman Wicker in welcoming our new members, Senator Slotkin, Senator Banks, and Senator Sheehy. Welcome. We look forward to working with you. Mr. Hegseth, I welcome you and your family to today's hearing, and I'm also glad to recognize my former colleague, Norm Coleman, and Congressman Mike Walsh. Thank you, Congressman. Mr. Hegseth, I want to begin by saying that I respect and appreciate your military service in the Army National Guard. I know from experience that there is no greater privilege than to lead American soldiers, and I thank you for answering the call.

You have been nominated to be the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary is responsible for leading a department of 3.5 million service members and civilians, an annual budget of nearly $900 billion, and hundreds of thousands of aircraft, ships, submarines, combat vehicles, satellites, and the nuclear arsenal. The Secretary also plays a powerful role with our allies, partners, and adversaries abroad. And as we speak, China is seeking to undermine

our interests, intimidate our friends, and challenge our standing in the world. Russia's campaign against Ukraine threatens not only Europe, but the entire global order. Ongoing violence in the Middle East has teetered on the edge of all-out war, and the ideologies and actions of violent extremists endanger our citizens, even on our own soil, as the recent tragedy in New Orleans painfully reminds us. These are perilous times, and the position of Secretary of Defense demands a leader of unparalleled experience, wisdom, and above all else, character. The Secretary is expected to be a fair, nonpartisan and responsible leader, as well as a trustworthy advocate for the men and women that he leads.

Mr. Haig said, I do not believe that you are qualified to meet the overwhelming demands of this job. We must acknowledge the concerning public reports against you. Variety of sources, including your own writings implicate you with disregarding the laws of war. Financial mismanagement, racist and sexist remarks about men and women in uniform. Alcohol abuse, sexual assault, sexual harassment and other troubling issues. I reviewed many of these allegations and find them extremely alarming.

Indeed, the totality of your own writings and alleged conduct would disqualify any service member from holding any leadership position in the military, much less being confirmed as the Secretary of Defense. you reject many of these reports as they involve whistleblowers, non-disclosure agreements, and anonymous, although numerous, sources, including those who have faced political intimidation for sharing their experiences. I hope you will address each of these allegations thoroughly and truthfully during your testimony. Just as importantly, I hope you will pledge to prevent any repercussions for whistleblowers, both civilian and military, if confirmed. Mr. Hexeth, during our meeting last week, you said that if confirmed, your top priority would be, quote, restoring a warrior culture to the Department of Defense. Because you believe the U.S. military has been weakened by political correctness.

Over the years, you have made clear your opinion of the military's diversity initiatives. As you have said, quote Diversity is not our strength. Unity is. And a recent podcast. You said, quote I'm straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. When I joined the army as a young officer in the 1970s, the U. S military was rife with racial tension. Women were prohibited from serving in most roles. Gay service members

were banned and we relied on our national draft to fill our ranks. The soldiers I served with were proud to do so. But it was certainly not the nation's most capable military by any standard. We have made great progress since then. Today, the top of the fence is fully integrated. Every race and religion is accepted. Women serve in all combat roles and leadership positions.

Sexual orientation is irrelevant to service and the all volunteer force visibly reflects the nation it protects. Our military is more diverse than it has ever been, but more importantly, it is more lethal than it has ever been, but more importantly, it is more lethal than it has ever been. This is not a coincidence. Mr. Hegstead, I hope you'll explain why you believe such diversity is making the military weak and how you propose to undo that without undermining military leadership and harming readiness, recruitment, and retention. Mr. Hegg said another reason I'm deeply concerned about your nomination is your disregard for the law of armed conflict

and your support for service members who have been convicted of war crimes. You have championed the pardoning of military members who were turned in by their fellow soldiers and SEALs. Let me emphasize that. They weren't discovered by reporters. They were turned in by fellow soldiers and fellow seals. And also pardoning of military contractors convicted of killing 14 Iraqi citizens without course. You have also advocated for the restitution of interrogation methods like waterboarding that have been defined as torture.

And you have belittled the advice and counsel of Judge Advocates General while on deployment. In your book, The War on Warriors, you write quote. Should we follow the Geneva Convention? If our warriors are forced to follow rules arbitrarily and asked to sacrifice more lives so that international tribunal people better about themselves. We just better off and winning our wars according to our own rules? Mr. Hicks, I would ask that

you explain how you, if confirmed, would maintain good order and discipline within our forces and the support of our allies and partners by rejecting international law and the law of war. I'm also concerned about your abilities as a competent manager of organizations far less complex than the Department of Defense. From 2008 to 2010, you led the organization Veterans for Freedom, which had an annual budget of less than $10 million. In each year you were in charge, expenses far exceeded revenues until the organization teetered on bankruptcy and had to be merged with another group. In fact, according to public reporting, an independent forensic

accountant reviewed the organization's finances and discovered evidence of gross financial mismanagement. I would note that this report has not been made available to any government agencies. Which is, I think alarming, but a Republican advisor to you during your tenure at the organization who read the report stated on a quote. I watched him run an organization very poorly. Lose the confidence of donors. The organization ultimately folded and was forced to merge with another organization. Who individuals felt could run and manage funds on behalf of donors more responsibly than he could.

I don't know how he's going to run an organization with an 857 billion dollar budget and three million individuals. And that is the only comment we've had. And the only access we've had to the forensic report. A similar thing happened with the Concerned Veterans for America, a second veterans group that you led from 2011 until 2016. During those five years, tax records show that the organization spent more than it raised. Just as troubling are reports that a significant amount of debt was incurred from social events and parties filled with excessive drinking. And questionable personal behavior. Mr Hicks said. I hope you will explain what actions you will take if confirmed.

To be a better steward of defense departments. Large budget. Finally, while I appreciate a meeting last week, it is unacceptable that you did not meet with any other Democratic members of this committee before this hearing. As has been our bipartisan tradition. During my time in the Senate, I voted for and work closely with Secretary of Defense appointed by Republican presidents. While we may disagree politically, there was always an understanding that rank partisanship should have no place when it comes to providing for the men and women who serve in uniform.

And Mr Hegs said I am troubled by the many comments you have made both as a commentator and in your published writings. For example, in your book American Crusade, you wrote quote. Modern leftist who represent the soul of the modern Democratic Party literally hate the foundational ideas of America. You also wrote the other side. The left is not our friend. We are not esteemed colleagues, nor mere political opponents. We are foes. Either we win or they went. We agree on nothing else.

Mr Hicks that have confirmed a secretary of fence. You would lead an organization that, like the country it represents is composed of Democrats and Republicans. Yet your language suggests that you regard many of these men and women as foes. And I would ask you to explain why service members and civilians who did not share your political opinions can trust. That they will not be targeted during your tenure. Indeed, the challenge of the Secretary of Defense is to remove partisan politics from the military.

You propose to inject it. This would be an insult to the men and women who have sworn to uphold their own apolitical duty to the Constitution. Mr. Hegstad, you are the ninth nominee for Secretary of Defense that I've had the honor to consider as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. I have voted in favor of all your predecessors, including those in the first Trump administration. Unfortunately, you lack the character and composure and competence to hold the position Secretary of Defense. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Reid.

And now it's my privilege and honor and pleasure to recognize two witnesses who have come forward to introduce our nominee. First, I recognize my former colleague and force intern Norm Coleman. Uh, of Minnesota for the purpose of an introduction, Norm. We are glad to see you and glad to have you back and you are recognized for the introduction. Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Right. Member read members of the committee. My former colleagues. I'm honored to introduce a son of Minnesota to you. Pete Hegseth as a senator from Minnesota. I spent many hours with this young man as he walked the halls of Congress advocating on behalf of America's veterans. And he is young in the best sense of the word. He is strong, focused, intelligent, incisive, a great listener and is almost supernaturally

energetic. Just what we need in a secretary of defense. In times of massive change. He is the real deal. F Scott Fitzgerald was a writer in my city of Saint Paul. And so the problem with America is that there are no second acts. He was wrong. He was a brave soldier has been an able communicator, and I believe is about to begin a great second act as our secretary of defense.

He has struggled and overcome great personal challenges. Please don't give into the cynical notion that people can't change. We need the ones who can change to lead us to be beacons of hope and to remind us that grace can lead us home. Four years ago, President Biden's nominee, Lloyd Austin, a good and honorable man, received 97 votes on the floor of the Senate. And we went through the debacle of the Afghanistan withdrawal. Putin invaded Ukraine. The Houthis endanger our shipping lanes. We witnessed Israeli miracles

against America's enemies in the Middle East, where the United States was more of an impediment than a help. Our recruitment numbers have sunk dramatically, and our southern border has suffered a slow but dangerous invasion. Yes, Pete Hegseth is an out-of-the-box nominee, and I say it's high time to get out of the box. One more thought say it's high time to get out of the box. One more thought. The country longs for a government of less division and more respect and dignity. My hope is that this committee hearing provides what they are asking for. Disagree? Yes, strongly if necessary, but then come together to support the nominee, this nominee, Pete Hegseth, of the one president we have at a time. Laying aside partisan politics for the essential mission of national security upon which everything else depends.

Mr Chairman, I yield. Thank you, Norm. I do appreciate that and appreciate your presence today. I now have the honor and pleasure of Introducing Congressman Waltz. I understand Congressman. You are still a member of the House for another day or two. Another day or two. Okay, and, um, I'm now recognized Congressman Walsh. For whatever opening statement and introduction he might make. Thank you, Chairman Wicker and Chairman has a very nice ring to it. So, uh, congratulations ranking member read distinguish

Members of this committee. It is a privilege to appear before you today and urge the members of this committee to confirm Pete Hegseth is our next secretary of defense, and I'm not here today just to advocate on behalf of a future. Colleague, but to speak on behalf of someone I consider a dear friend for over a decade and now decade now, like Pete. I served in the U. S Army like Pete. I'm a veteran. We deployed to Afghanistan and all over the world at the height of the war on

terror. Which is the war of our generation. And like thousands of other war fighters. We've witnessed the hardships of war. We've experienced the loss of friends and combat. We've endured too much time away from family and friends and no one. I can promise you this. No one hates war more than those who have had to go fight it. No one does. Pete story, though, isn't that much different from the millions

of other veterans, and they know it and they appreciate him for the experiences that he's gone through. And after our country was brutally attacked on 9 11. Pete Hegseth answered the call of duty like so many others. He put the interests of this country ahead of his own. And I can tell you firsthand, as can the heroes sitting in this audience behind me. Pete's character of country, his selflessness.

His duty. These are the key tenants that have shaped him into the leader that he is today. These are the traits that President Trump recognized when making the decision to nominate Pete for this critical role. He will bring the perspective of being the first secretary of defense to have served as a junior officer on the front lines, not in the headquarters on the front lines in the war on terror and recognizes The human costs, the financial costs and the policy drift.

That was discussed often in this very room. That led us to decades and decades of war. So not only does he understand the threats he faces, but as the chairman mentioned. He is Brilliant in my mind at communicating those to the American people. In a way that is often not communicated in Washington, D C to reach out to the American people so that they understand why the military

needs to do what it needs to do. And look, I have no doubt that he is going to get the Pentagon back to its primary mission. Lethal readiness. That warrior ethos is what our enemies will respect that warrior ethos is what our enemies will fear, and it's that warrior ethos that will keep the peace and ladies and gentlemen. In my humble opinion, our military deserves better than it's getting. Our country faces a devastating recruitment crisis. Men and women

are not volunteering to serve at the levels required. Our readiness is down. Our costs are up, and it seems like nearly every major weapons system. Again, often discussed in this very room. Is costing too much delivering too little and taking way too long. The bottom line is the status quo is unacceptable. It's not working. And the members of this committee. You all know it.

You know it's not working and the members of the House Armed Services know it's not working, and we have hearing after hearing year after year. And here we are decades later describing The same problems that Pentagon has continuously failed audits. The businesses that want to do business with the Pentagon have to pass an audit, but the entity itself Fails and audit innovation is stalled. Morale is down. Standards

have been weakened and meritocracy is less value. And as a result, our adversaries have been emboldened all over the world. Ladies and gentlemen, it's time for change. It is time for change. You all have literally seen thousands of veterans as the chairman cited one amazing Medal of Honor recipient. But we have seen thousands of veterans expressing their support for

Pete. This is a man who can reinvigorate that warrior ethos, and this is a man that will lead. I can't imagine Having a more capable partner in my position is national security adviser. Pete is a man of family of faith, and he's committed to making our country stronger again and Most importantly.

Brother. I know this in my core. He will always have as a first principle. The service members. That are out there on the front lines for all of us at the heart of every decision he makes. So senators, I urge you to support this confirmation. Is critical that President Trump has his national security team in place for the challenges ahead, and I thank you.

Thank you, Mike, for your testimony, and I'm guessing that each and every member of this committee will want to have you on speed dial. For the next few years. Thank you both. Our two guests may stay or I know they have other engagements and responsibilities also. But thank you both for your testimony. At this point, Mr. Hexeth, I'm required to ask you as a nominee a series of questions that the committee asks all civilian nominees who appear before it. If you would, please simply respond in the affirmative or negative to each question.

Have you adhered to applicable laws and regulations governing conflicts of interest? Yes, sir. Have you assumed any duties or taken any actions that would appear to presume the outcome of the confirmation process? No, sir. Exercising our legislative and oversight responsibilities makes it important that this committee, its subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive testimony, briefings, reports, records, and other information from the executive branch on a timely basis. Do you agree, if confirmed, to appear and testify before this committee when requested? Yes, sir.

Do you agree to provide records, documents, and electronic communications in a timely manner when requested by this committee, its subcommittees, or other appropriate committees of Congress, and to consult with the requester regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial in providing such records. Yes, sir. Will you ensure that your staff complies with deadlines established by this committee for the production of reports, records and other information including timely responding to hearing questions for the record. Yes sir. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses and briefers in response to congressional requests?

Yes sir. Will those witnesses and briefers be protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings? Yes, sir. All right. So so at this point, Mr. Hexeth, you recognize for your opening statement. Well, thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reid, and all the members of this committee for this opportunity today. I'm grateful for and have learned a great deal from this advise and consent process. Our founders knew what they were doing. Should I be confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee, senators from both parties,

to secure our nation. I want to thank the former senator from Minnesota, Norm Coleman, for his mentorship and friendship in this process. And the incoming National Security Advisor, Congressman, and more importantly for our purposes, Colonel Mike Walz for his powerful words. I'm grateful to them both. Thank you to my incredible wife, Jennifer, who has changed my life and been with me throughout this entire process.

I love you, sweetheart, and I thank God for you. And as Jenny and I pray together every morning. All glory, regardless of the outcome belongs to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. His grace and mercy abounds each day. May his will be done. Thank you to my father, Brian, and Mother Penny, as well as our entire family, including our seven wonderful kids, Gunner, Jackson, Peter Boone, Kensington, Luke, Rex, sorry, it's a lot of them, and Gwendolyn.

Their future safety and security is in all of our hands. And to all the troops and veterans watching and here in the room, Navy SEALs, Green Berets, soldiers, pilots, sailors, Marines, Gold Stars, and more. Too many friends to name. Officers, enlisted, black and white, young and old, men and women, all Americans, all warriors. This hearing is for you. Thank you for figuratively and literally having my back. You are a misogynist. Not only that, you are a Christian son of a bitch.

Shut up! Shut up! How did Joe Biden sneak in here? How'd he do it? I want to thank the authorities for their swift reaction To that outburst and state that that similar interruptions will be treated in like manner. Mr Hexeth. You may continue. Well, as I'll say again, thank you for figuratively and literally having my back.

I pledge to do the same for all of you. It's an honor to come before this committee today as President Donald Trump's nominee for the Office of Secretary of Defense. Two months ago, 77 million Americans gave President Trump a powerful mandate for change. To put America first at home and abroad. I want to thank President Trump for his faith in me and his selfless leadership for our republic. The troops have no better commander-in-chief than Donald Trump.

As I've said to many of you in private meetings, when President Trump chose me for this position, the primary charge he gave me was to bring the warrior culture back to the Department of Defense. He, like me, once a Pentagon, laser-focused on lethality, meritocracy, warfighting, accountability, and readiness. Who let Kamala Harris into the hearing? How'd they let Kamala in? Who let Kamala? You may continue, sir. Hitting the sauce. Returning the Pentagon back to war fighting?

That's it. That's my job. Mr. Higgs, suspend your remarks. Let me just say this, the Capitol Police are going to remove immediately individuals that are disrupting the hearing. I see a pattern attempted to be inflicted on the committee and we're simply not going to tolerate that. You may proceed.

To bring back war fighting. If confirmed, I'm going to work with President Trump and this committee. To one restore the warrior ethos to the Pentagon and throughout our fighting force. In doing so, we will reestablish trust in our military. Addressing the recruiting crisis, the retention crisis and readiness crisis in our ranks. Members of the security force will remove members. Goodness gracious, what a bunch of lunatics. Mr. Heseth, you may, you may. The strength of our military is our unity and our shared purpose not our differences?

Number two, we're going to rebuild our military, always matching threats to capabilities. This includes reviving our defense industrial base, reforming the acquisitions process. As you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, no more valley of death for new defense companies. Modernizing our nuclear triad, ensuring the Pentagon can pass an audit and rapidly fielding emerging technologies. And number three, we're going to reestablish deterrence. First and foremost, we will defend our homeland, our borders and our skies. Second, we will work with our partners and allies to deter aggression in the Indo Pacific from the communist Chinese. And finally, we will responsibly end wars to ensure that we prioritize our resources

to reorient to larger threats. We can no longer count on reputational deterrence. We need real deterrence. The Department of Defense under Donald Trump will achieve peace through strength. And in pursuing these America first national security goals will remain patriotically apolitical and stridently constitutional. Unlike the current administration, politics should play no part in military matters. We are not Republicans. We are not Democrats. We are American warriors.

Our standards will be high. And they will be equal. Not equitable. That's a very different word. We need to make sure every warrior is fully qualified on their assigned weapons system. Every pilot's fully qualified and current on the aircraft they are flying. And every general or flag officer is selected for leadership or promotion purely based on performance, readiness and merit. Leaders at all levels will be held accountable and war fighting and lethality and the readiness of the troops and their families will be our only focus. This has been my focus ever since I first put on the uniform as a young Army ROTC cadet at Princeton University in 2001.

I joined the military because I love my country and felt an obligation to defend it. I served with incredible Americans in Guantanamo Bay, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and on the streets of Washington, D.C., many of which are with me here today. This includes enlisted soldiers I I helped become American citizens. And Muslim allies. I helped immigrate from Iraq and Afghanistan. Because when I took off the uniform, my mission never stopped. Now it is true and has been acknowledged that I don't have a similar biography to defense secretaries of the last 30 years. But as President Trump also told me, we've repeatedly placed people atop the Pentagon with supposedly the right credentials.

Whether they are retired generals, academics or defense contractor executives. And where has it gotten us? He believes, and I humbly agree. That it's time to give someone with dust on his boots the helm, a change agent, someone with no vested interest in certain companies or specific programs or approved narratives. My only special interest is the warfighter. Deterring wars and if called upon winning wars by ensuring our warriors never enter a fair fight. We let them win and we bring them home.

Like many of my generation, I've been there. I've led troops in combat. I've been on patrol for days. I've pulled the trigger downrange, heard bullets whiz by, flex-cuffed insurgents, called in close air support, support led medevacs dodged IEDs pulled out dead bodies and knelt before a battlefield cross this is not academic for me this is my life I led then and I will lead now. Ask anyone who's ever worked for me or with me. I know what I don't know. My success as a leader, and I very much look forward to discussing my organization's successes at Vets for Freedom and Concerned Veterans for America. I'm incredibly proud of the work that

we've done. But my success as a leader has always been setting a clear vision, hiring people smarter and more capable than me, empowering them to succeed, holding everyone accountable and driving toward clear matrix metrics. Build the plan, work the plan and then work harder than everyone else around you. I've sworn an oath to the Constitution before and if confirmed, I will proudly do it again. This time for the most important deployment of my life. I pledge to be a faithful partner to this committee, taking input and respecting oversight. We share the same goals. A ready lethal military, the health and well-being of our troops, and a strong and secure America. Thank you for the time, and I look forward to your questions.

SEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Hagsith. Before we begin with member questions, I would like to remind my colleagues that consistent with the bipartisan staff agreement from December and in concert with exactly how this committee dealt with the last Secretary of Defense nominee each member will be recognized for one round of seven minutes to question the nominee out of respect for the time of all members of this committee the time limits will be tightly enforced it we've now been here

45 minutes and I think we've done very well with the time. But at this point, I will begin my questioning of the nominee. Mr. Hexis, you and your family have endured criticism of your nomination since it was announced in November. Um, let's get into this allegation about, um Sexual assault, inappropriate workplace behavior, alcohol, abuse and financial mismanagement during your time as a nonprofit executive. I should note that the majority of these have come from anonymous sources in, um Liberal media publications, but I want to give you

an opportunity to respond to these allegations, sir. Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, thank you for that opportunity. Um, you are correct. We undertook this responsibility with an obligation to the troops to do right by them for our war fighters and what became very evident to us. From the beginning. There was a coordinated smear campaign orchestrated in the media against us. That was clear from moment one.

And what we knew is that it wasn't about me. Most of it was about President Donald Trump, who's had to endure the very same thing for much longer amounts of time. And he endured it incredibly, incredibly strong ways. So we in some ways knew it was coming. We didn't understand the depth. Of the dishonesty that would come with it. So from story after story in the media left wing media. We saw anonymous source after anonymous source based on second or third hand accounts. And time and time again, stories would come out and people would reach out to me and say, I've spoken to this reporter about who you really are and I was willing to go on the record. But they didn't print my quote.

They didn't print any of my quotes. Or I've worked with you for ten years, or I was your accountant, or I was your chief operating officer, or I was your board member. Or I was with you on a hundred different tour stops for Concerned Veterans for America. No one called me. No one asked about your conduct on the record or off the record. Instead, a small handful of anonymous sources were allowed to drive a smear campaign and agenda about me because our left wing media in America today, sadly doesn't care about the truth. All they were out to do, Mr Chairman was to destroy me.

And why do they want to destroy me? Because I'm a change agent and a threat to them because Donald Trump was willing to choose me, to empower me, to bring the Defense Department back to what it really should be, which is war fighting. So I'm willing to endure these attacks. But what I will do is stand up for the truth and for my reputation. False attacks, anonymous attacks,

repeated ad nauseum printed as naughty, nauseam as facts. We have provided to the committee. Mr Chairman, and I know you're going to share On the record statement after on the record statement from people who have served with me worked with me at Fox News concern vets vets for freedom. You name it. From the top of the chain to the bottom. Who will say I treat them with respect, with kindness, with dignity? That's men, that's women, that's black, that's white, that's every background. I have prided myself as a leader of respecting people, being professional.

That is the balance of mind. I'm not a perfect person, as has been acknowledged. Saved by the grace of of God by Jesus and Jenny. I'm not a perfect person, but redemption is real. And God forged me in ways that I know I'm prepared for. And I'm honored by the people standing and sitting behind me and look forward to leading this Pentagon on behalf of the war fighters. Thank you, Mr Hexer. And frankly, I'm sure there are millions of Americans watching who would agree that they've experienced that same sort of redemption.

So I do appreciate that. I realize that it involves a little bearing of the soul, but thank you for that. Now let's talk about top-line defense spending. I have a plan. I think you've read it. I issued another plan for Freedom's Forge, which you've also had a chance to look at. And you have noted correctly that the current trend line of defense spending falling below 3% of our GDP is a threat to national security. You also said building the strongest and most powerful military in the world must be done responsibly, but it cannot be done on the cheap. You still agree with that, do you not? Yes, sir, I do. So tell us what you think about,

particularly about my plan to make the defense department less bureaucratic, less top heavy, cut out some of the bureaucracy and layers, make it more more friendly to startups into new ideas contained in my 20 or so page white paper. Um, defending freedoms forge. Senator. I've had a chance to review the forged act like paper. Um, defending freedoms forge. Senator. I've had a chance to review the forged act that paper. Those are precisely the kinds of ideas that need to be pursued, and I look forward to working with this committee to ensure we

cut the red tape. We incentivize innovation. We rebuild the defense industrial base cut out the bureaucracy. All the things that are preventing The platforms and the tools from getting rapidly from our great defense companies here that should and those that want to compete into the hands of war fighters. But past his prologue on this, sir, and I would just look at what President Trump after the did after the drawdowns of lead from behind under President Obama. President Trump rebuilt our military. He didn't start wars. He ended them, and he didn't allow wars to start on his watch. We've had the same kind of defense cuts under

the Biden administration. And so, look, I would present to the committee the reputation of President Donald Trump and me coming alongside him to ensure we have peace through strength by rebuilding our military, investing as necessary. Going under 3%, Mr. Chairman, is very dangerous. Okay, we've got 45 seconds. Tell us, in that point, get us started at least talking about deterring China and the Indo-Pacific. It starts with... Truck month is on at Chevrolet.

Get 0% financing for up to 72 months on a 2025 Silverado 1500 Custom Blackout or Custom Trail Boss. With Custom Trail Bosses available, Class Exclusive, Duramax 3-liter diesel engine, and Z71 Off-Road Package with a 2-inch factory suspension lift, you get both on-road confidence and off-road capability. Dirt road ahead? Let's go! Truck Month is awesome! Ask your Chevrolet dealer for details. Priorities. The 2017 National Defense Strategy was the first step in reorienting away from simply entanglement in the Middle East, which our generation knows a lot about,

and reorienting the behemoth that is the Pentagon toward new priorities, specifically the Indo-Pacific. So that strategy has started and was barely followed through on under the Biden administration. So we're going to start by ensuring the institution understands that as far as threats abroad, the CCP is front and center, also obviously defending our homeland as well. Thank you very much, Senator Reid. You're recognized. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Before I begin my questioning, I would like to make three requests. First. Many of my members would like a second round that has been the

custom. Senator Hagel was afforded three rounds. Senator Ash Carter, two rounds. And that was done by Republican chairman with the consent and the appropriate guidance of Democrats. I must say to my recollection is I've never denied anyone. The opportunity to ask the second round of questions as I chair. I would request the second round.

And my time is running. I think these are and. Oh, yeah, you're using your time. No, if the timekeeper will will pause the time. I, I must say, I think we're going to have adequate time for questioning. And I know Democrat members have have um, have coordinated their questions as much as we have. And we are we're following the same exact precedent on on all things that we did with Secretary Austin. So, uh, I, um, I respectfully understand what you're saying, but I think we have an agreement. It's been known for quite some time. And I intend to stick with that agreement, which we made. Last December. What is your second request? Second, uh Has been public before you and I have both seen the FBI background investigation. Mr Hicks said.

And I want to say for the record, I believe the investigation was insufficient. Frankly, uh There are still FBI, uh Obligations to talk to people. They have not had access to the forensic audit. Which I referenced to and the person who had access to was quite critical of Mr Hickson. Uh, I think people on both sides have suggested that they get the report. I know your colleagues have asked for it. Senator Thune assured me personally that he thought it was an appropriate

idea. Uh, so I would ask and I would say to as the president, uh, one of President Trump's appointees had similar, very complicated personal issues. The report was made available to all the members of the committee. We would be following precedent. I asked that that be made possible. Again. We are There's been much discussion about this.

And what I intend to do is follow the exact precedent that we've had for the last two hearings with regard to secretaries of defense. Not only Secretary Austin, but Secretary Mattis eight years ago. And that was for the chair and the ranking member to see the report. And so that is my intention as chair of this committee. Finally, Mr Chairman, I have several letters that I would include for the record. One from County Hero, which is an organization of retired four

star generals and former Secretary of Defense. That is critical of the proposed purge panels. One from a organization for domestic violence. One for a Council on American relations. Uh, and also, uh, excuse me and also, uh, several letters. Uh, that raised questions. I would ask they be submitted for the record without objection. They will be Submitted and and mr. Reid your time is now expired

Just kidding. Yeah, you you're recognized for seven minutes Thank you. You're a very understanding chairman. I like that. I like that Miss exit you've've written in its quote. Oh, yeah, and fire any general who is in carried water for Obama and Biden's extra constitution and agenda driven transformation for our military. Clean house and start over. It's come to my attention that current serving military personnel have received emails threatening them with being fired. For supporting the current DoD policies. One mail that was sent to a military officer with the subject line clean house.

Reminiscent of your specific comment. States and I quote with the incoming administration looking to remove disloyal, corrupt, traitorous, liberal officers such as yourself. We will certainly be putting your name into the list of those personnel to be removed. We know you support the woke D. I policies and will ensure you never again influence anyone in the future. You and redacted spouses name will be lucky if you're able to collect

your military requirement." Now I want to remind everyone that these policies that are being referred to date back decades, so the 1940s and 50s with respect to racial discrimination particularly, and administrations of both parties, including the Trump administration and their first party. Cause those policies to be enforced. Mr. Hasn't head said. Are you aware of these emails being sent to offices? Senator.

You mentioned the word accountability. Which is something we have not had for the last four years. Are you aware of these messages being sent to offices? Certainly I'm not aware of that. It's not one of my efforts, but there's been no accountability for the disaster of the withdrawal in Afghanistan. And that's precisely why we're here today is that leadership has been unwilling to take accountability. It's the time to restore that to our scene. Most senior ranks. You have written publicly that D I policy of distraction and have military personnel walking on edge shells. Do you believe that emails like that that are essentially threatening

both Serving officer and a spouse and claiming that they'll lose their pension will have a distraction and detract from the lethality. Senator. You mentioned the forties and and 50s, and you're precisely right. The military was a forerunner in courageous racial integration in ways no other institutions were willing to do. I served with men and women of all backgrounds because of the courage of people decades and decades ago.

It's incredibly important. However, the DEI policies of today are not the same as what happened back then. They're dividing troops inside formations, causing commanders to walk on eggshells, not putting meritocracy first. That's the indictment that's made by those serving right now and why we're having this conversation.

Mr. All of your public comments don't talk about meritocracy. They talk about liberal democratic efforts that are destroying the military that those people are enemies. That's not meritocracy. That's a political view. And your goal is I see emerging is to politicize the military in favor of your particular positions, which you've outlined extensively, which would be the worst blow to the professionalism of the United States military and would undercut readiness, undercut retention because I can see officers receiving these emails beginning

to wonder very seriously if they should continue. Let me change subjects for a moment here. You've been instrumental in securing pardons for several convicted war criminals. In at least two of these cases, the military personnel who served in combat with these convicted service members were not supportive of the pardons. They did their duty as soldiers to report war crimes. Your definition of lethality seems to embrace those people who do commit war crimes rather than those who stand up and say this is not right. So what's response your service members who? Personally witnesses and took

Courageously reported them to their superiors. Senator as someone who's led men in combat directly and had to make very difficult decisions. I thought very deeply about the balance between legality and lethality. and had to make very difficult decisions. I've thought very deeply about the balance between legality and lethality, ensuring that the men and women on the front lines have the opportunity to destroy with and close the enemy, and that lawyers aren't the ones getting in the way. I'm not talking about disavowing the laws of war or the Geneva Conventions or the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Sir, I'm talking about restrictive rules of engagement that these men and women behind me understand they've lived with

on the battlefield which has made it more difficult to defeat our enemies. In many of the cases you're talking about in particular, sir, there was evidence withheld, there was prosecutorial misconduct, and as someone who looks case by case and defaults to the warfighter to the men and women with dust on their boots Not the second-guessers in air-conditioned offices in Washington DC Excuse me I look case by case and was proud to work with President Trump to understand those cases and ensure That our warriors are always looked out for those cases were adjudicated were by adjudicated by who? People in Washington or fellow non-commissioned officers who had also served, sacrificed, and believed in the ethic of the military?

Who were the court martial trial? Senator, in multiple cases they were actually acquitted. In some cases, yes. Regardless of where those competing authorities were, yes sir. Some were, but others were convicted and you asked for pardon. That's the only reason you asked for pardon, because others were convicted and you asked for pardon. That's the only reason you asked for a pardon, because they were convicted. But the other factor, too, is you've already disparaged in writing the Geneva Convention, the rules of law, all of these things. How will you be able to effectively lead a military in which one of the principal elements is discipline,

respect for lawful authority. You have made statements to your platoon after being briefed by a JAG officer. By the way, would you explain what a JAG officer is? I don't think I need to, sir. Why not? Because the men and women watching understand. Well, perhaps some the men and women watching understand. Well, perhaps some of my colleagues don't understand. It would be a JAG officer who puts his or her own priorities in front of the warfighters. Their promotions, their medals in front of having the backs of those who are making the tough calls on the front lines. Thank you, Senator.

Interesting. Thank you, Senator. Thank you very much. Senator F Interesting. Thank you. So thank you very much, Senator Fisher. Thank you, Mr Chairman and welcome, Mr Hegseth to you and your family. Thank you for the meeting that we had. We talked about a number of things. First and foremost was that nuclear weapons are foundational to our

national defense and having a safe, effective and credible nuclear deterrent underpins our alliances. And as you know, it deters our adversaries. Nuclear deterrence has been and you and I, I believe, agreed on this. It must continue to be unequivocally the highest priority mission of the Department of Defense. But deterrence only works if our adversaries believe our nuclear forces are effective and credible. All three legs of our triad are undergoing that generational recapitalization programs, and we cannot afford any more delays in those programs. Sir, do you believe Um and agree with President Trump's 2018 nuclear posture review that preventing adversary nuclear attacks is quote the highest priority

of the United States. Senator Yes, I do. If confirmed, will you commit to supporting all three legs of the nuclear triad and using every tool available to deliver these systems on schedule? Senator, yes, I do, because ultimately our deterrence, our survival is reliant upon the capability, the perception, and the reality of the capability of our nuclear triad. We have to invest in its modernization for the defense of our nation. Well, former secretaries of defense have stated that nuclear deterrence is the highest priority.

We haven't really seen that translated into budget requests. Or using the tools like the Defense Production Act. You've spoken about increasing lethality. You've spoken about getting programs done faster. How would you actually implement a culture change so that we can see these delivery schedules move forward, be rewarded? I can tell you in most every briefing we

have, um The schedules were on or too late. So what would you do? Well, ultimately focused first on the things that are most important, as we have discussed Senator the nuclear triad understanding whether it's the B 21 or the minute man to the Sentinel. All aspects of the Columbia class submarines, ballistic missiles. What are the priorities that need to be focused on and ensure that in those particular cases you mentioned it. Senator the defense Production Act emergency powers if we're the

place where our nuclear capabilities are perceived to not be what they are. That is An emergency. And we have an ally in our incoming commander in chief in President Donald Trump, who has spoken about these things understands the power and strength of nuclear deterrence, will not allow them to be deprioritized. It's the existential threat. It's the existential threat to this nation. How do you change the culture? It's not just the Production Act that's going to be able to do it. How are you going to move forward faster?

Competition, Senator, is important, critically important. The Death Valley that was talked about leveraging the innovation of Silicon Valley, which for the first time in generations has shown a willingness, desire, and capability to bring its best technologies to bear at the Pentagon, a Pentagon that has become too insular, tries to block new technologies from coming in. So we have to embrace that, provide. There's some great Office of Strategic Capital, D.I.U. initiatives that provide loans to companies to participate because you have to invest in that. You have to invest in the defense industrial base

for the longer term projects. We have the capability, the missiles and the munitions, but also to rapidly field emerging technologies that we need on the battlefield right now. So as we learn things, say, in the war in Ukraine, those technologies, as we look at threats we're going to face, find ways to rapidly field those using off-the-shelf technologies or standard designs, modular designs. Another easy one, Senator, that became evident in the process is digital designs. The Pentagon often builds entire systems without first using a digital design, which means you build prototypes and then scrap them and start over again.

No private sector business could survive doing business that way. So there's a lot of innovation, and I'm going to hire a lot of smart people already have to help with that. In the 2025 NDAA, it was established to a new position, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Deterrence, Chemical and Biological Defense Policy and Programs. And that was established so we could cut through a lot of the bureaucratic stovepipes that that we see in the office of the Secretary of Defense if confirmed will you direct the Department of Defense components to expeditiously implement this reform I it sounds I would you I would want to look directly exactly what that reform is I take your word that it's great, Senator. I will review it robustly and I look forward to implementing it.

Okay. Thank you. During the first Trump administration, the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review concluded that the U.S. needed to once again develop and deploy a nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile known as slick him to offset significant Russian and Chinese advantages in theater range nuclear capabilities. Since then, Congress on a strong bipartisan basis has directed the Navy and the National Nuclear Security Administration to continue this effort. Do you support the SLECOM program? SEN. As of right now, Senator, based on what I know, I do. But one of my answers I'll have repeatedly throughout this morning is getting an opportunity to look under the hood,

classified material, get an understanding of true capabilities vis-a-vis enemy capabilities. Because what we know right now on the nuclear, sorry, Senator, what I know on the nuclear side is that Russia and China are rushing to modernize and build arsenals larger than ours. We need to match threats to capabilities and the systems we elevate will be tied to whether those capabilities are needed based on the adversaries. Would you? Would you? Would you ensure that this program is executed according to law? Absolutely. Absolutely. Senator What short short here? What is your plan to revitalize the industrial base in this country needs to be real short serious investment targeted at

systems that we truly need by also incentivizing competition and laser focus from the OSD from the Office of Secretary of Defense to all the particular strategic initiatives to revive them so it's not just one system it's multiple systems you may want to expand on that on the record. At this point, my colleagues, I would ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter organized by a group called Flag Officers for America, which has 120 retired generals and admirals offering their support for Mr. Hex's nomination. I asked unanimous consent without objection. It is Entered into the record. Senator Shaheen. Good morning, Mr. Hexeth.

Good morning, Senator. I was pleased when I was contacted on your behalf about meeting before this hearing. I've been on this committee since 2011 and during that time I voted to confirm six nominees to be secretary of defense from three administrations to Democratic and one Republican. The first Trump administration. Every one of those nominees met with me and my Democratic colleagues on this committee before the hearing. So as you can imagine, I was disappointed when

No one ever followed up when we followed up with your office. You were not able to meet. Do you understand that if you're confirmed to be secretary of defense that you will have a responsibility to meet with all members of this committee, not just Republicans. Senator. I very much appreciate and understand the traditionally bipartisan nature of this committee. Their national defense is not partisan. It should not be about Republicans or Democrats, and so I look forward to working together with

You and your colleagues on on priorities facing this nation. Yes, I think we would expect that. And one reason that I wanted to meet with you. Was because I thought we would expect that. And one reason that I wanted to meet with you was because I thought it would be really helpful to better understand your views on women in the military. Because you've made a number of surprising statements about women serving in the military. Um As recently as November the 7th of 2024 on the Sean Ryan show, you

said, and I quote, I'm straight up saying that we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn't made us more effective. The quote went on a little longer, but that was the gist of it. That was before you were nominated to be Secretary of Defense. Mr. Hegseth, Do you know what percentage of our military is comprised of women? I believe it's 18 to 20% Senator. It's almost 18%. And in fact, DoD's 2023 demographic report indicated that there are more women serving now. And there are fewer separations, so they make up a critical part of our military. Wouldn't you agree?

Yes, ma'am. Women in our military, as I have said publicly, have and continue to make amazing contributions across all aspects of our battlefield. Well, you also write in your book, the war on warriors with the chapter, the deadly obsession with women warriors that quote quote, not only are women comparatively less effective than men in combat roles, but they are more likely to be objectified by the enemy and their own nation in the moral realms of war. Mr. Hegseth, should we take it to believe that you believe that the two women on this committee who have served honorably and with distinction made our military less effective and less capable. I'm incredibly grateful for the for the two women who served our military in uniform and including In the Central Intelligence Agency contributions on the battlefield.

Indispensable contribution. Senator I would like to clarify when I'm talking about that issue. It's not about the capabilities of men and women. It's about standards and this committee has talked it's about standards. And this committee has talked a lot about standards, standards that we unfortunately over time have seen eroded in certain duty positions, certain schools, certain places, which affects readiness, which is what I care about the most, readiness on the battlefield. I appreciate that.

And so my comments point time and time again to standards. Your statements publicly have not been to that effect. After your nomination, you did state to a group of reporters that you quote support all women serving in our military today who do a fantastic job across the globe, including combat. Um, so What I'm confused about Mr Hegseth is which is it? Why should women in our military, if you were the Secretary of Defense, believe that they would have a fair shot and an equal opportunity to rise through the ranks? If

on the one hand you say that women are not competent, they make our military less effective, and on the other hand you you say, Oh, no, now that I've been nominated to be the secretary of defense. I've changed my view on women in the military. What do you have to say to the almost 400,000 women who are serving today about your position on whether they should be capable to rise through the highest ranks of our military. Senator, I would say I would be honored to have the opportunity to serve alongside you. Shoulder to shoulder men and women of color and women of color and through the highest ranks of our military. Senator. I would say I would be honored to have the opportunity to

serve alongside you shoulder to shoulder men and women, black, white, all backgrounds with a shared purpose. Our differences are not what define us. Our unity in our shared purpose is what define us and you will be treated fairly with dignity, honor and respect, just like every man and woman in uniform, just like the men and women that I've worked with in my veterans organizations, to include when I was a headquarters and headquarters company commander in the Minnesota National Guard. Well, I appreciate your 11th hour conversion, but Mr. Chairman, for the record,

I would like to submit Chapter 5, the deadly obsession with women warriors, for the record. Mr. Hegstaff. Without objection, it will be submitted. Are you familiar with the women, peace and security agenda at the Department of defense? Yes, ma'am. I am. This is a law that was signed during President elect Trump's first term. It was legislation that I sponsored with Republican Senator Capito of West Virginia. It was co sponsored by

Marco Rubio, the nominee to be the president elect Secretary of State. It was led in the House of Representatives by Kristi Noem, the president elects nominee to be the secretary of Homeland Security. It mandates that women be included in all aspects of our national security, including conflict resolution and peace negotiations. And at the Department of Defense, it has been the law for eight years under both the Trump and Biden administrations. The DOD has incorporated women throughout its decision making as a result. Every single combatant commander across two administrations has told this committee that this law and its implementation at the Department of Defense provides them a strategic advantage operationally. Based on your comments, it appears that the example that you would like to set not only for women in this country, but for women across the globe, 50% of the world's population as the prospective nominee to lead the most combat credible military in the entire world,

is that women should not have an equal opportunity in our military. So will you commit to preserving the women, peace and security law at DOD and including in your budget the requisite funding to continue to restore and resource these programs throughout the D O D. Senator. I will commit to reviewing that program and ensuring it aligns with America first national security priorities, meritocracy, lethality and readiness. And if it advances American interests, it's

something we would advance if it doesn't. It's something we will since Former President Trump side will the law. I hope that he agrees with you. Thank you, Senator Shaheen. At this point, I would ask unanimous consent. To enter into the record five letters of support from female service members and combat veterans who support Mr. Hegseth's nomination. These women represent diverse viewpoints from a retired colonel with over 25 years of service to an active duty Navy surface warfare commander to a senior airman.

They support Mr. Hegseth and comment on his focus on merit, warfighting readiness, military training status, and the warrior ethos. So without objection, it will be entered into the records. And now I'm honored to recognize Senator Cotton for seven minutes. Mr Hegseth. Let's continue on this line of questioning about what sometimes referred to as women in combat. I think that phrase is something of a misnomer. Many members of this committee.

Have served in combat in the last 25 years to include women and men. I'm sure all those men served with women, whether they were military police officers or they were pilots or whether they were intelligence analysts or medics or have you you served. I assume you served with women. Who are on the front lines as well as that. Yes, sir. And were those women anything other than skilled, brave and honorable in their service. They were some of the best soldiers I work with. So women have been

serving in combat for a long time. Women have been serving in Combat units like infantry battalions for a long time and roles like medics or mechanics or have you. So what we're talking about here They've even been serving combat units like infantry battalions for a long time and roles like Medics or mechanics or have you. So what we're talking about here specifically Is women in ground combat roles in jobs like infantrymen or artillerymen or special forces. Until about 10 years ago. That wasn't the case under Secretary Panetta. Those roles were opened up to women to serve

in. Um This is President Trump indicated all that he plans to rescind or alter that guidance. You're correct to point out, Senator that these are the decisions that the commander in chief will have the prerogative to make. He has not indicated me to me that he has plans to change whether or not women would have access to these roles.

However, I would point out that he has plans to change whether or not women would have access to these roles. However, I would point out ensuring that standards are equal and high is of importance to him and great importance to me. Because in those ground combat roles, what is true is that the weight of the ruck on your back doesn't change. The weight of the 155 round that you have to carry doesn't change. The weight of the 240 Bravo machine gun you might have to carry doesn't change. And so whether it's a man or a woman, they have to meet the same high standards and senator in any place where those things have been eroded or in courses criteria have been changed.

In order to meet quotas, racial quotas or gender quotas that is putting a focus on something other than readiness standards, meritocracy and lethality. So that's the kind of review I'm talking about, not whether women have access to ground combat. Okay, so thank you. So you expect no change that guidance. But as you point out in these specific jobs, there are irreducible physical demands. We expect our intelligence analysts and our mechanics to be physically fits in the military, but it's different when you're in the infantry or their artillery. You just mentioned a few things. Let me point it

out. An artillery shell weighs almost £100 and Abrams tank round weighs around £50. The M two 240 Bravo machine gun with its tripod weighs almost 50 pounds. The average weight of a full kit ammo, water, comma. Body armor for a soldier is over 100 pounds. Nothing you can do to can change any of those things, right? That is physical reality. Uh Go ahead. Yes, Senator, and I would say

The requirements to handle those things in a ground combat unit as far as standards can look different than those of a medic or a drone pilot. And so it's not that it has to be the same standard throughout its standards to maximize efficacy of that particular position. Let me read a quote here from one army officer. Well, it may be difficult for a 120 pound woman to lift or drag 250 pounds. The army cannot artificially absolve women of that responsibility. It may still exist on the battlefield. The entire purpose of creating

a general gender neutral test was to acknowledge the reality that each job has objective physical standards to which all soldiers should be held regardless of gender. The intent was not to ensure that women were able to be held regardless of gender. The intent was not to ensure that women and men will have an equal likelihood of meeting those standards. I assume based on your testimony, you agree with that army officer. Absolutely. The standards need to be the same, and they need to be

high, and they need to be set by the people closest to the problem set closest to the understanding of what is required by that job. Commanders commanding officers and COCOMS and elsewhere who understand the reality of what they face. That's the feedback we should get. That's what should be enshrined and enforced and no other set of political prerogatives. when I talk about removing politics, ideological or political product, Progatives should contribute to those determinations. Nothing other than the execution of the mission. Thank you. For the record that army officer was Captain Kristen greased. The Army's first female infantry officer and one of its first female ranger school graduates. One final point. You said they need to be objective, gender neutral and high.

That's because the demands are, in fact, very high. The current physical fitness test for the army has a minimum two mile run of 22 miles run. And I want the reporter to note that I'm putting run in air quotes because 22 miles at two miles is not running. It may be jogging. It's probably walking fast. Um Let's move on. Got a big 22 minutes.

We've got a big audience here. Many of them seem to be patriotic supporters of you, Mr Hex. That some of them seem to be liberal critics of you. I would note that it's of them seem to be liberal critics of you. I would note that it's only The liberal critics that have disrupted this hearing, as was my custom. During the Biden administration. I want to give you a chance to respond to what they said about you. I think the first one. Accused you of being a Christian Zionist. I'm not really sure why

that is a bad thing. I'm a Christian. I'm a Zionist. Zionism is that The Jewish people deserve a homeland. In the ancient Holy Land where they've lived since the dawn of history. Do you consider yourself a Christian Zionist senator? I support. I am a Christian and I robustly support the state of Israel and its existential defense and the way America comes alongside them is a great thank you because another one another protester and I think this one was a member of Code Pink, which, by the way, is a Chinese Communist Front group these days.

Said that you support Israel's war in Gaza. I support Israel's existential war in Gaza. I assume like me and President Trump. You support that war as well. Don't you, Senator? I do. I support Israel destroying and killing every last member of Hamas. And the third protesters said something about 20 years of genocide. I assume that's our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you think our troops were committing genocide? Afghanistan, Senator. I do not. I think our senator our troops, as

you know, as so many in this committee know, did the best they could with what they have. We're not the outcomes and tragically, the outcome we saw in Afghanistan under the Biden administration put a stain on that, but it doesn't put a stain on what those men and women did in uniform, as you know, full well, Senator. Thank you, Mr. Exit. Thank you, Senator Cotton. At this point, I offered I asked unanimous consent to offer to the record.

A letter submitted by Omar Abbasi. Son of former City Council president of Samara Iraq. Who worked with Mr Hexeth in Iraq without objection that will be entered. Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Hegseth. I do want to thank you for your service, and I want to thank you for your willingness to serve in this capacity. Thank you, Senator. I have many concerns about your record, and particularly your public statements, because they are so hurtful to the men and women who are currently serving in the US military.

Harmful to morale. Harmful to good order and discipline. If you are saying that women shouldn't be serving in the military, and I'm going to read you your quotes, because the quotes themselves are terrible. You will have to change how you see women to do this job well, and I don't know if you are capable of that. So I want to press on these issues that my colleague Jean Shaheen brought up because she said it so well. So first of all, you answered your questionnaire, do you believe that any American who wants to serve their country in the military and

can meet objective standards set by the military should be allowed to serve without limitation? You've said yes to that question. But then in all of these other circumstances, you've denigrated active duty service members. We have hundreds, hundreds of women who are currently in the infantry. Lethal members of our military serving in the infantry, but you degrade them. You say, we need moms, but not in the military, especially in combat units. So specific to Senator Cotton's question, because Senator Cotton was giving you layups to differentiate between different types of combat. And specifically, as secretary, would you take any action to reinstitute the combat arms exclusion for

female service members, knowing full well you have hundreds of women doing that job right now. And the standards, your two mile run, Tom, is about the Army combat fitness test. It is not the requirements to have an MOS 11 Bravo, which is the infantry. These are the requirements today for people serving in the industry, men and women. They are gender neutral and they are very difficult to meet. They have not been reduced in any way. And our combat units, our infantry is lethal. So please explain specifically because you will be in charge of 3 million personnel. It is a big job. And when you make these public statements, and I get you were not Secretary of Defense then.

I get you were on TV. I get you were helping veterans. I get it was a different job. But most recently, you said this in November of 2024, knowing full well you might have been named as Secretary of Defense. So please explain these types of statements, because they're brutal and they're mean, and they disrespect men and women who are willing to die for this country. Well, Senator, I appreciate your comments.

And I would point out, I've never disparaged women serving in the military. I respect every single female service member that has put on the uniform past and present. My critiques, Senator, recently and in the past, and from personal experience, have been instances where I've seen standards lowered, and you mentioned 11 Alpha, 11 Bravo, MOS, places in units, and the book that has been referenced multiple times here, The War on Warriors, I spent months talking to active duty service members, men and women, low ranks, high ranks, combat arms and not combat arms.

And what each and every one of them told me, and which personal instances have shown me, is that in ways direct, indirect, overt, and subtle standards have been changed inside infantry training units, ranger school, infantry battalions to ensure that commanders meet. Give me one example. Please give me an example. I get you're making these generalized statements. Commanders meet quotas to have a certain number of female infantry officers or infantry enlisted, and that disparages those women commanders do not have to have a quota for women in the infantry that does not exist it does not exist and your statements are creating the impression that they're that these exist because they do not there are not

quotas we want the most lethal force but i'm telling you, having been here for 15 years listening to testimony about men and women in combat and the type of operations that were successful in Afghanistan and in Iraq, women were essential for many of those units. When Ranger units went in to find where the terrorists hiding in Afghanistan or in Iraq, if they had a woman in the unit, they could go in, talk to the women in a village, say where are the terrorists hiding, where are the weapons hiding, and get crucial information to make sure that we can win that battle. So just—you cannot denigrate women in general, and your statements do that.

We don't want women in the military, especially in combat. What a terrible statement. So please, do not deny that you've made those statements you have. We take the responsibility of standards very seriously and we will work with you. I'm equally distressed you would not meet with me before this hearing. We could have covered all of this before you came here so I could get to the 15 other questions that I want to get to. So women you have denigrated, you have also denigrated members of the LGBTQ community. Did you know that when Don't Ask, Don't Tell was in place,

we lost so many crucial personnel, over a thousand in mission critical areas. We lost 10% of all our foreign language speakers because of a political policy. You said in your statement, you don't want politics in the DOD. Everything you've said in these public statements is politics. I don't want women. I don't want moms. What's wrong with a mom, by the way? Once you have babies, you therefore are no longer able to be lethal. I mean, you're basically saying women after they have children can't ever serve in the military in a combat role. It's it's a silly thing to say. It's a silly thing to say.

Beneath the position that you are aspiring to. To denigrate LGBTQ service members is a mistake. If you are a sharpshooter, you're as lethal regardless of what your gender identity is, regardless of who you love. So please know this to be a true statement. So you say it was a political thing. You say it undermined was a political thing. You say, um, it undermined us social engineering. I don't know why having someone having to publicly say or not publicly say who they love is social engineering. I think having that policy in the first place was highly problematic.

And As you said in your statement, do you agree? Anybody should be able to serve in the military if they meet the standards? Senator as the president has stated, I don't disagree with the overturn of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Great, because I don't want you thinking can't serve if you're a mom, can't serve if you're LGBTQ. And then last, can't serve if you're a leftist. The statements you said about people who have views differently than you that were the enemy. Are you saying the 50% of the D O D if they hold.

Liberal views or leftist views or our Democrats are. Not welcome in the military. Are you saying that? Senator I volunteered to deploy to Afghanistan under Democrat President Barack Obama. I also volunteered to guard the inauguration of Joe Biden, but was denied the opportunity to serve because I was not a Democrat. to deploy to Afghanistan under Democrat President Barack Obama. I also volunteered to guard the inauguration of Joe Biden, but was denied the opportunity to serve because I was identified as an extremist by my own unit for a Christian tattoo.

Uh, thank you very much, Senator Gillibrand. You held up a document and referred to it during your questioning. Would you like that entered into the record? You held up a document and referred to it during your questioning. Would you like that entered into the record? It may be one without my marks. Okay, we'll delete. We'll submit a clean copy. Without objection, that will be admitted at the point of your question. And I would like to enter into the record at this point a letter of support from retired Air Force Colonel Melissa Cunningham. Colonel Cunningham supports Mr Hexeth and mentions his warrior

ethos, combat effectiveness and maintaining military training standards. So without objection, both of those will be admitted and I now recognize into rounds. Thank you, Mr Chairman. First of all, Good morning. I'd like to thank you for your service to our nation in uniform and also your work on behalf of your Fellow veterans and for your willingness to enter into this maelstrom of public service. Make the presence of so many veterans who have showed up to support you speaks volumes. I also want to recognize your family service and sacrifice. You know as well as anyone that it's not just the man that enters the arena, but it's the entire family who also works their way through this process as well. I appreciated our meeting with you and with your wife, Jennifer, this last month.

I thought that we had an excellent conversation, and I appreciate your statement and your answers to the advanced policy questions. Especially your desire to bring a renewed focus on warfighting and lethality back to the Pentagon. I also respect and I appreciate my friend and colleague Senator Gillibrand and some of her questions. And I know that she had a number of them in there. You had an opportunity to respond very briefly.

Were there any other responses that you would like to make or clarifications that you would like to make before I move on to my questions? Mr. Senator, thank you very much for the opportunity to meet and for the question. I would I would also acknowledge you were mentioning female engagement teams, which have shown a great deal of success on the battlefield. It would be and universally acknowledged as such. I've been in Iraqi homes where the language and gender barrier was real.

And the ability to have someone there to help in that process would be a massive accelerant in mission success. I recognize that reality. I also recognize that female engagement teams assigned to a SEAL team or a Green Beret team meet different standards also, which is okay because of the duty positions involved in that job. As far as politics, Senator, it has been the joy of my life to lead men and women in military outfits. When you're in combat or in training, there's a lot of conversations that happen and you start to realize that a lot of people you're

serving with share your political ideas or they don't. You find out there's Republicans, there's Democrats, there's libertarians, there's independents, there's vegetarians. Everything in between. None of that matters. It never mattered in how I led men and women how I interacted with them. What missions we undertook politics has nothing to do with the battlefield.

Which is why President Trump has asked me to say, Let's make sure all of that comes out. This is about warfighting capability, setting standards high and making sure we give our boys are men and women everything they need of that comes out. This is about warfighting capability, setting standards high and making sure we give our boys are men and women everything they need to be successful on the battlefield. So politics can play no part in that, and I look forward to infusing that as we always have inside our units. I appreciate you making that very clear. And I one of the areas that

we want to do our best is to provide for the equipment and the technical capabilities so that no young man or woman enters into a battle as a fair fight and that they always have the advantage those are the types of questions that I'd like to get into right now and I want to start by talking about something that sometimes gets a little bit into the weeds, but I think it's critical. Um, Mr Hegseth from what I've heard from 24 senior DOD officials and hearings over the last two years, including the Secretary of Defense. Every service chief and eight combatant commanders. Is that sharing the portion of the spectrum, and this is in the weeds, I know, but I'm going to ask you to get it on the record. The 3.1 to 3.5 GHz band would have extremely serious consequences and very costly conflict consequences on our warfighting capabilities. In fact, the Department of the Navy alone is estimated that relocating

their systems to a different part of the spectrum band would cost them $250 billion. That's just for the destroyers that defend our coasts with the radars that they have in them. If confirmed, what will you do to make sure that the Department of Defense can maintain its access to and the use and to be able to maneuver within the electromagnetic spectrum at home and abroad. And would you be willing to literally go to the mat with the inter agency to protect warfighter requirements.

For the use of the spectrum. Senator. Thank you for the question in my job. In part will be to go to the mat when necessary for things I believe are an action absolute requirement for the Department of Defense and the men and women in uniform. There's no doubt about that. On this in this particular case, as far as spectrum, I look forward, as I've said before, getting a full class because this issue has come up a number of times in meetings. It's

critically important with how how our warfighters communicate across all services. So I'm going to get a classified briefing immediately about what that would how it would impact the spectrum. If it were to allow other companies or other it to be offered to share China would know China would love to have our ability to use that part of the spectrum restrict. They would love that. Absolutely right. And so I will go in with eyes only toward ensuring

we have the capabilities we need and there's no disruption when I take that brief. Thank you. In your advanced policy questions, you recognize a cooperative approach by China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea to undermine U.S. influence around the world. As you point out, aggression by one or by any one actor would be an opportunity for others to engage the US on multiple fronts Along the continuum of the conflict as we discussed in my office Neither of us wants to send our troops into a fair fight We want to make sure that they have every advantage that the United States can give them and that requires resources and reforms Given the growing potential of a multi-theater conflict involving near-peer

adversaries, what steps would you take to prepare the Department of Defense to simultaneously execute and sustain operations across multiple regions while maintaining readiness and deterrence globally? And I just have to make note, and I want to make it clear, we have language in this year's fiscal year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act calling for a review of the department's operational plans. And I just want to make sure that you that you're aware of that and that we will have if we have a fight with one chances are very good that we're going to have two battles or two different battlegrounds

at the same time. Senator, which what which is why I believe our country's Incredibly fortunate to have a new commander in chief in Donald Trump, who, through the strategic approach he has taken with allies and against foes has prevented wars and is determined to do the same. That's our chief job is deter and prevent wars. My job should I be confirmed at the secretary of defense is to ensure we have the right prioritization of assets. And strategy and then the tools in the toolbox necessary, the

point is possible spear for President Trump. To wield if necessary as the last resort. So President Trump at the helm, I think will go a long way in making sure our enemies know there's a new sheriff in town. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you very much, Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having this hearing. Thank you for being here, Mr. Hegseth.

And I want to join in expressing appreciation and respect for your service to our country and thanks to all the veterans who are here today and thank you for your service as the ranking member of the Veterans Affairs. I mean, I hope we can focus on doing better for our veterans and doing better. In management of the Department of Defense. There's always room for improvement. I think what we need. In that position is not just better, but the best. In financial management because those decisions are life and death decisions affecting the 3.4 million Americans. Who served our national security in our national defense and put their lives. On the line. I want to talk about financial mismanagement.

At the two organizations that You headed, which are the only test of your Financial management that we have before this committee, the veterans for freedom and concerned veterans for America. You took over The veterans for freedom in 2007. In 2008, you raised 8.7 million dollars, but spent more than 9 million

Creating a deficit. By January 2009. You told donors that The organization had less than $1000 in the bank and debts of 434 $1000 By 2010 revenue at the Veterans for Freedom had dropped to about $265,000 In the next year. It had dropped further about $265,000. In the next year.

It had dropped further to $22,000. You don't dispute these numbers. Do you? Senator. I'm extremely proud of the work me and my fellow vets did at that's for freedom. A bunch of Young vets with no political experience, a small group working hard every single day. We raised donor funds and we have letters submitted for the record from almost everyone that worked with me every single day, including our chief operating officer, who will attest that every dollar we raised was used intentionally toward the execution of our mission, which is

supporting the warfighters, exactly why we're here today, the warfighters in the Iraq surge. There was a campaign in 2008, Senator. It was Barack Obama versus John McCain. We believe John McCain would be the right person to win, and so we spent more. I'm glad they're in for the record. I'm going to ask to be entered into the record. Mr Chairman. Um, without objection. These tax returns are Yours. They have your signature. And I'm going to ask that members of the committee review them because they're the only documents.

I've asked for others. I've asked for the FBI report that would presumably document. It should have documented. This kind of financial mismanagement and these are the 9 90s from That organization. By the year of 2011 donors had become so dissatisfied with that mismanagement. They in effect ousted you. They merged that organization with military families united. And thereafter you joined a second organization as executive director

that concerned that I went to Harvard. I want to ask you years and I want to ask you questions about concerned veterans for America. Again. Another set of tax returns and nine nineties from that organization I asked they'd be made part of the record. Mr Chairman without objection, though both of those returns are now part of the record. 2011 to 2016 At the end of 2013 shortfall of $130,000 at the end of 2014 shortfall

of $428,000. You had a surplus the following year, but then another deficit. Of $437,000 by the time you left that organization had deep debts, including Credit card transaction debts of about $75,000. you left that organization had deep debts, including Credit card transaction debts of about $75,000. That isn't the kind of fiscal management we want at the Department of Defense. We can't tolerate At the Department of Defense. That's an organization with A budget of 850

Billion dollars, not 10 or 15 million, which was the case at those two organizations. And it has Command responsibility for 3.4 million Americans. The highest number that you managed in those two organizations was maybe 50 people. Let me ask you how many Men and women now serve in the United States Army. What is then strength?

Senator. I would like an opportunity to respond to well, I've been acutely my leadership of a veteran's organization concerned about America. You're on the V. A committee, sir, and I appreciate your service there. The VA Accountability Act and the Mission Act were all brainchilds of Concerned Veterans for America. We used our donor money very intentionally and focused to create policy that bettered the lives of veterans. Mr. Hegseth, I'm asking you a very simple question.

How many men and women currently served in the United States Army Senator of the United States Army 450,000 on active duty, sir. And how many in the Navy? And the Navy is 425, Sir. Well, it's 337 this year. How many in the Marine Corps 175 175,000, sir. 172,300. Those numbers dwarf any experience you had by many multiples. I don't believe that you can tell this committee or the people of America that you are qualified To lead them. I would support you. As the spokesperson for the Pentagon.

I don't dispute your communication skills. But I believe that we are entitled to the facts here. I've asked for more documents. I assume you'd be willing to submit to an expanded FBI background check. That interviews your colleagues, accountants, ex wives. Former spouses, sexual assault survivors and others, and enable them to come forward. Senator. I'm not in charge of FBI background checks, but you would submit to it and support it.

I'm not in charge of FBI background checks. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. I at this point when I submit a letter from Captain Wade Circle. The founder of vets for freedom. And the person who hired Pete Hexeth to run the organization, although the two to 2008 financial crisis dried up fundraising for non-profits, Captain Zirkle says, and I quote, Pete responded to this crisis with decisive action by reducing staff and renegotiating all debts with creditors until they were fairly resolved.

An impressive feat and a testament to Pete's character. Pete departed VFF in 2010 to take on a new role with concerned veterans for America. Pete departed on good terms without objection that will be added to the record. Senator Ernst, you're recognized for seven minutes. Thank you, Mr Chair, and I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record. A letter submitted by Mr Mark Lucas, who is a fellow Iowan and Iowa Army National Guard member. Mr Lucas and I served together in the Iowa Army National Guard. He succeeded Pete Hegseth as executive director of Concerned Veterans for America and in his letter Mr. Lucas says that Mr.

Hegseth quote laid a strong foundation that postured CVA for long-term success end quote and that Mr. Hegseth quote continued to be an invaluable asset to both me as a leader and the organization and quote. So I would ask for unanimous consent to enter this Washington Times article and the letter from Mr Mark Lucas into the record without objection. Thank you, Mr Chair. Good morning, Mr Hegseth and thank you very much.

I appreciate your service to our nation. It's something that I know you are very proud of, and it is something that we have in common and that we share. You and I have had many productive conversations. And just for our audience, we have had very frank conversations. Is that correct, Mr. Hegseth? Senator, that is a correct characterization. You know that I don't keep anything hidden, pull no punches. My colleagues know that as well. So I do appreciate you sitting down and allowing me the opportunity to question you thoroughly

on those issues that are of great importance to me. Just to recap those issues, three that are very important. One is the DoD and making sure that we have a clean audit. The second is women in combat, and we'll talk a little bit more about that in a moment. And the third was maintaining high standards and making sure that we are combating sexual assault in the military. Okay, so Mr. Hegseth, I'm going to address the issue, because this will tie into some

of the financial concerns that have been raised here as well. And it's why, you know, I'm trusting my fellow Iowan asked for unanimous consent of this letter to go into the record. But like me, a lot of Iowans are really, really concerned and upset about the wasteful Washington spending and, of course, in our Pentagon. It's an issue that I have been combating for years. So there's significant room for greater efficiency and cost cutting within the department. And the DOD is the only federal agency that has never passed an audit.

As the Senate Doge Caucus chair and founder, that's unacceptable to me, and it should be unacceptable to you as well. So I appreciate that you mentioned Concern Veterans for America I just want to clarify we have very generous donors who set a very clear budget that we stuck to every single year so the latitude there was was restricted and we worked very hard and diligently inside it you've also been a leader on the Pentagon order audit for a very long time I I think when we met senator I said 2014 was the first year we discovered a 2013 long time. I think when we met, Senator, I said 2014 was the first year. We discovered a 2013 op-ed I wrote about the need for a Pentagon audit because an audit is an issue of national security and, frankly, respect to American taxpayers who give $850 billion over to the Defense Department and expect that we know where that money goes. And if that money is going somewhere that doesn't add to tooth and instead goes to fat or tail, we need to know that. Or if it's wasted, we need to know that. So I think previous secretaries of defense, with all due respect, haven't necessarily emphasized the strategic prerogative of an audit. And myself, my deputy, SecDef, and others already know that a Pentagon audit will be the comptroller, others central to ensuring we find those dollars that can be used elsewhere

legally under the law inside the Pentagon. So you have my word. It will be a priority. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Moving on to women in combat. And I had the privilege of serving in uniform for over 23 years. Between our Army Reserves and our Iowa Army National Guard, did serve in Kuwait and missions in Iraq. And so it is incredibly important that I stress, and I hope that if confirmed, you continue to stress that every man and woman has opportunity to serve their country in uniform and do so at any level as long as they are meeting the standards that are set forward. And we we talked about that in my office. I do believe in high standards. Now I was denied the opportunity to serve in any combat role because I have a lot of gray hair.

And the policy has changed since then, okay? So I've been around for quite a while. But for the young women that are out there now and can meet those standards and again, I'll emphasize they should be very, very high standards. They must physically be able to achieve those standards. So that they can complete their mission. But I want to know again, let's make it very clear for everyone here today as Secretary of Defense. Will you support women continuing to have the opportunity to serve in combat roles? Senator. First of all, thank you for your service as we discussed extensively as well. My privilege and my answer is yes, exactly the way that you caveated it. Yes, women will have access to ground combat roles, combat rows, given the standards remain high and will have a review to ensure the standards have not been eroded.

In any one of these cases, that'll be part of one of the first things we do at the Pentagon is reviewing that in a gender neutral way, the standards standards ensuring readiness and meritocracy is front and center. But absolutely, it would be the privilege of a lifetime to if confirmed to be the secretary of defense for all men and women in uniform who fight so heroic. They have so many other options. They decided to put their right hand up for our country, and it would be an honor to have a chance to leave them. Thank you. And just very briefly. We only have less than a minute left, but we have also discussed this in my office. A priority. Priority of mine has

been combating sexual assault in the military and making sure that all of our service members are treated with dignity and respect. This has been so important. Senator Gillibrand and I have worked on this, and we were able to get changes made to the Uniform Code of Military Justice to make sure that we have improvements on how we address the tragic and life altering. Um issues of rape, sexual assault. It will demand time and attention from the Pentagon under your watch if you are confirmed. So a secretary of defense. Will you appoint a senior level official dedicated to

sexual assault prevention and response? Senator as as we have discussed, yes I will. Okay, and my time is expired. Thank you for your answers. Senator Hirono. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Hegsack, welcome. Thank you. I am focused on your fitness to serve, including your character and temperament and your overall qualifications to do the job.

And I do appreciate the comments of ranking member Reed with his concerns regarding your nomination because I share those concerns. As part of my responsibility as a member of this committee to ensure the fitness of all nominees to come before any of the committees on which I sit, I ask the following two initial questions. First, since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature? No, Senator. Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement relating to this kind of conduct? Senator, I was falsely accused in October of 2017.

It was fully investigated and I was completely cleared. I don't think completely cleared is accurate, but the fact is that your own lawyer said that you entered into an NDA and paid a person who accused you of raping her a sum of money to make sure that she did not file a complaint. Moving on. As secretary, you will be in charge of maintaining good order and discipline by enforcing the uniform code of military justice, UCMJ. In addition to the sexual assault allegations, and by the way, the answer to my second question should have been yes. I have read multiple reports of your regularly being drunk at work,

including by people who worked with you at Fox News. Do you know that being drunk at work is prohibited for service members under the UCMJ? Senator, those are multiple false anonymous reports peddled by NBC News that run directly contradictory to the dozens of men and women at Fox News Channel who I work with, who came on the record and said they've never seen that. I'm not hearing the answer to my question. In your opening statement, Mr. Hicks, that you commit to holding leaders accountable at all levels. That includes you, of course. And frankly, as Secretary, you will be on the job 24-7. You recently promised some of my Republican colleagues that you stopped drinking and won't drink if confirmed, correct? Absolutely.

Will you resign as Secretary of Defense if you drink on the job, which is a 24-7 position? I've made this commitment on behalf of the men and women I'm serving. Will you resign as Secretary of Defense if you drink on the job? I've made this commitment on behalf of the men and women I'm serving. I you resign as Secretary of Defense if you drink on the job? I've made this commitment on behalf of the men and women I'm serving. I'm not hearing- Because it's the most important deployment of my life. I'm not hearing an answer to my question, so I'm going to move on. While you have made that commitment, you will not commit to resigning if you drink on the job. As Secretary of Defense, you will swear an oath to the Constitution, and

not an oath to any man, woman or president. Correct. Senator on multiple occasions, including as a young second lieutenant. I have sworn an oath to the Constitution and I'm proud to do so. Yes, ma'am. In June of 2020, then President Trump directed former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper to shoot protesters in the legs in downtown DC. An order Secretary Esper refused to comply with. Would you carry out such an order from President Trump?

Senator, I was in the Washington DC National Guard unit that was in Lafayette Square during those events holding a riot shield on behalf of my country. Would you carry out an order to shoot protesters in the legs as directed to Secretary Esper? I saw 50 Secret Service agents get injured by rioters trying to jump over the fence, set the church on fire, and destroy a statue. You know what?

That sounds to me that you will comply with such an order. You will shoot protesters in the leg. Moving on. President Ulic has attacked our allies in recent weeks, refusing to rule out using military force to take over Greenland. And the Panama Canal and threatening to take to make Canada the 51st state, which you carry out in order from President Trump to seize Greenland, a territory of our NATO ally, Denmark. By force, or would you comply with an order to take over the Panama

Canal? Senator. I will emphasize that President Trump received 70% of the vote in the Senate. force or would you comply with an order to take over the Panama Canal? Senator. I will emphasize that President Trump received 77 million votes to be the lawful commander. We're not talking about the election. My question is, would you use our military to take over Greenland or An ally of Denmark.

Senator. One of the things that President Trump is so good at is never strategically tipping his hand. And so I would never in this public forum give one way or another direct what orders the president would give me in any context. It sounds to me that you would contemplate carrying out such an order to basically invade Greenland. And take over the Panama Canal. Current DOD policy allows service members and eligible dependents to be reimbursed for travel associated with non-covered reproductive health care, including abortions. Will you maintain this common sense policy? Senator, I've always been personally pro-life. I know President Trump has as well and we will review all policies but our our standard is

whatever the president wants on this particular issue. If the president tells you that this policy will not be maintained you will not enable our service members to seek reproductive care. So I don't believe the federal government. I'm not hearing answers to my questions. Chairman. I just want to note that the other area that of serious concern to me is President Trump saying that he wants to use the military to Help help with mass deportations, which will cost billions of dollars. And what that will do to readiness is very, very concerning.

Mr. Hicks, I have noticed a disturbing pattern. You previously have made a series of inflammatory statements about women in combat, LGBTQ service members, Muslim Americans, and Democrats. Since your nominations, however, you have walked those back on TV and interviews and most recently in your opening statements. You are no longer on Fox and Friends, Mr. Hexner. If confirmed, your words, actions, and decisions will have real impacts on national security and

our service members lives. There are close to 3 million personnel in the Department of Defense, $900 billion budget, I hardly think you are prepared to do the job. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator, thank you. That wasn't a question, Mr. Hagseth. Thank you, Senator Arono. Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Hegseth.

Congratulations on your nomination and thank you and your family for your service and sacrifice. Thank you, Senator. Now for the most important question you will receive all day. In 1935, before the Congress, the father of the United States Air Force General Billy Mitchell was testifying about a certain place in the world. He said, quote, I believe that in the future, whoever holds this place will control the world. This location is the most strategic place in the world. What place was Billy Mitchell talking about? And let me give you a hint. It wasn't Greenland.

I believe he was talking about the great state of Alaska. He was talking about the great state of Alaska. Great answer. If confirm, will you commit to come with me to the great state of Alaska? Meet our warriors who are on the front lines every day. Senator I have and as I mentioned to you in the past, I did a brief training exercise up at Fort Wainwright. Uh, previous part of my military life. I look forward to returning great in and I will say We are on the front lines. With this new era of authoritarian aggression in Alaska last two years, we've had Chinese and Russian naval task forces, joint strategic bomber task forces in our easy in our aid is and after are making menacing moves in the Pacific. Mr Hexup. If confirmed, will you work with me this committee and the

incoming commander in chief on continuing to build up our military assets and infrastructure in Alaska to re established deterrence in the Arctic. And in the Indo Pacific. If confirmed, Senator, it would be a pleasure. infrastructure in Alaska to re established deterrence in the Arctic and in the Indo Pacific. If confirmed, Senator, it would be a pleasure to work alongside you in this entire committee to recognize the very real threat in the

Indo Pacific. The very real ways even these past couple of weeks that Russia has attempted to probe and push it in around Alaska and also the very real strategic significance of Alaska vis-a-vis shipping lanes through the Arctic. There are many, many ways in which Alaska is strategically significant and with a shift toward a necessary shift toward Indo-PACOM. Alaska, by necessity, will play an important role in that. Thank you, Ms. Hegseth. I very much appreciate your focus on lethality and warfighting. We desperately need it. I want to provide a few examples of the Biden

woke military, which is not focused on readiness or lethality and want to get your comments on it. Nobody wants an extremist or racist in our military, but one of the most disgraceful and shameful things I've seen over the past four years as a senator on this committee and as a Marine Corps Reserve officer was on day one. The Biden administration played up a false and insulting narrative that our military was chock full of racist and violent extremists. This reached a pinnacle in this committee when Biden's under

Secretary of Policy Colin called the number three guy at the Pentagon, testified that one of his top goals would be to, quote, ending violent extremism and systemic racism within the ranks of the military. He had no data on this. The media loved it. Fan the flames, wrote baloney stories on this false narrative. Disappointingly, some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle here reinforce this ridiculous narrative, one even suggesting that almost 10% of our uniformed military was extremists. 200,000 members ridiculous. By the way, from this committee on the other side of the aisle, Mr

Hegseth, unlike under Secretary call, you have a lot of experience with our military. Do you believe the military is a systemically racist organization? And if confirmed, will you commit to defend not denigrate our troops? Senator. I was also offended by those comments because anyone who's been on active duty in the National Guard man woman in units understand that is fundamentally false. By the way, there's three studies to his credit sector. Austin put out one of them that said exactly what you

just said fundamentally false senator, they knew it. Anyone who'd been in a unit knew it. One could argue that if not the least, one of the least racist institutions in our country is the United States military. That's right. Being a racist in our military has not been tolerated for a very long time. One of the greatest civil rights organizations in America. Would you agree the US military is one of the Most forward leaning, probably one of the greatest civil rights organizations in American history. No doubt. Let me turn to another one. Last year at a hearing before this committee, I called on the Biden secretary of the Navy to resign. Because he's failing in his ability to build ships. We are being

completely out built in terms of ships by the Chinese. And yet this secretary, the Navy has been focused on climate change. Not building ships in lethality. Mr Secretary, Mr Hegseth. If your secretary Navy ends up focusing on climate change more than shipbuilding and lethality, will you commit to me to fire him? My secretary of the Navy, should I be confirmed, sir, will not be focused on climate change in the Navy. Just like the secretary of the Air Force won't be focused on LG powered fighter jets. Or the Secretary of the Army will not be focused on electric powered tanks. Let me ask. We're going to be focused on lethality. One minute

left feeding our enemy and I appreciate that. The other thing President Biden did his first executive order. As president was the focus on transgender surgeries for active duty troops. This is all I'm describing the woke military here under Biden over the last four years and I'm not going to go into the details of that. But I'm going to go into the details of the military. to focus on transgender surgeries for active duty troops. This is all I'm describing the woke military here under Biden over the last four years. If confirmed and you issued an order saying we are going to rip the Biden woke yoke off the neck of our military.

And focus on lethality and more fighting. How do you think the troops will react? Senator. I know the troops will rejoice. They will love it. They will love it. And we've already seen it in recruiting numbers. There's already been a surge since President Trump won the election of recruiting. The Army says it will surpass its retreat goals.

And our military will follow that order? Our military will follow that order, Senator. Gladly. Gladly, because they want to focus on lethality and war fighting and get all the woke political prerogative politically correct social justice, political stuff out of the military. Thank you, Senator Sullivan. Senator King. Thank you, Mr Hegseth. I'm looking forward to this opportunity to

talk. I want to return to the incident that you reference a minute ago that occurred in Monterey, California in October 2017. At that time, you were still married to your second wife, correct? I believe so. And you had just fathered a child by a woman who would later become your third wife, correct? Senator. I was falsely charged. I'm fully investigated and completely cleared. So you think you and completely cleared.

So you think you are completely cleared because you committed no crime. That's your definition of cleared. You had just fathered a child two months before by woman that was not your wife. I am shocked. That you would stand here and say you're completely cleared. Can you so casually cheat on a second wife and sheep on the mother of a child had been born two months before and you tell us you were completely cleared. How is that a complete clear?

Senator, her child's name is Gwendolyn Hope Hegseth, and she's a child of God, and she's seven years old. And you cheated on the mother of that child less than two months after that daughter was born, didn't you? Those were false charges. Well, no, fully investigated, and I was completely cleared, and I'm so grateful for the marriage I have to this. No, you've admitted that you had sex at that hotel on October 2017. You said it was consensual. Isn't that correct? Anything? You've admitted that it was consensual and you were still married and you just had a child by another woman again. How do you explain your judgment? False charges against me. You know, I investigated and completely clear. You have admitted that you had sex while you were

buried to wife to after you just had fathered a child by wife three. You've admitted that now if it had been a sexual assault, that would be disqualifying to be Secretary of Defense, wouldn't it? If it's a false claim then and a false claim now. If it had been a sexual assault, that would be disqualifying to be Secretary of Defense, wouldn't it? That was a false claim. So you're talking about a hypothetical. So you can't tell me whether someone who has committed a sexual assault is disqualified from being Secretary of Defense Senator I know in my instance and I'm talking about my instance only it was a false claim but you acknowledge it was you acknowledge that you cheated on your wife and

That you cheated on the woman who by whom you had just fathered a child you have been met at that I Will allow your words to speak for them. You're not retracting that today. That's good. I assume that in each of your weddings, you've pledged to be faithful to your wife. You've taken a note to do that, haven't you? Senator, as I've acknowledged to everyone in this committee, not a perfect person, not claiming to be just ask the simple question. You've taken an oath like you would take a note to be secretary defense and all of

your weddings to be faithful to your wife. Is that correct? I have failed in things in my life, and thankfully I'm redeemed by my Lord and Savior Jesus in finalizing divorces from your first and second wives were there non disclosure agreements in connection with those divorces. Senator not that I'm aware of. If there were, would you agree to release those first and second wives from any confidentiality agreement. Senator. It's not something I'm aware of.

But if there were you would agree to release them from a confidentiality senator. That's not my responsibility. Did you ever engage in any acts of physical violence against any of your wives? Senator. Absolutely not. But you would agree with me that if someone had committed physical violence against the spouse that would be disqualifying to serve as Secretary of Defense, correct? Senator Absolutely not. Have I ever done that? You would agree that that would be a disqualifying offense. Would you not?

Senator, you're talking about a hypothetical. I don't think it's a hypothetical violence against spouses occurs every day. And if you as a leader are not capable of saying. That physical violence against a spouse should be a disqualifying fact. For being secretary of the most powerful nation in the world. You're demonstrating an astonishing lack of judgment. The incident in Monterey led to a criminal charge or criminal investigation

of private settlement and a cash payment to the woman who filed the complaint. And there was also a nondisclosure agreement, correct? It was a compilation confidential settlement agreement off of a nuisance lawsuit, right? During an interview, you claim that you settled the matter because you were worried that if it became public, it might hurt your career. Do you maintain that you were blackmailed?

Senator. I maintain that false claims were made against me and ultimately your attorney's false claims. You have the opportunity to attest my innocence in those false claims, but you didn't reveal any of this to President Trump or the transition team as they were considering you. To be nominated for secretary of defense. You didn't You didn't reveal the the action. You didn't reveal the criminal complaint. You didn't reveal the criminal investigation. You didn't reveal the settlement.

You didn't reveal the cash payment. Why didn't you inform the commander in chief of the transition team of this very relevant event? Senator. I've appreciated every part of the process with the transition team. They have been open and honest with me. We've had great conversations between the two of us, and I appreciate the opportunity that President elect that you but you chose not to reveal this right because you know it would hurt your chances. So you chose not to reveal this really important thing to the commander

in chief of the transition team because you were worried about your chances. So you chose not to reveal this really important thing to the commander in chief of the transition team because you were worried about your chances rather than trying to be candid with the future president, the United States. Are there any other important facts that you chose not to reveal to the president elect in his team as they were considering you to be secretary of defense? Senator. I sit here before you in open book as everyone who's watched this process with with multiple non disclosure and confidentiality

agreements tying the hands of many people who would like to comment to us. Much of much has been made of your workplace behavior as a leader of nonprofit veterans organizations and as a Fox News contributor. Were you fired from either of the leadership positions with the nonprofits? I was the leader of the CEO of Those two direct were you fired? Were you fired from me? I was never fired from a non non disclosure agreements with either of those organizations. Not that I'm aware of Senator.

Many of your work colleagues have said that you show up for work under the influence of alcohol or drunk have said that you show up for work under the influence of alcohol or drunk. I know you've denied that, but you would agree with me, right, that if that was the case, that would be disqualifying for somebody to be Secretary of Defense. Senator, those are all anonymous false claims, and the totality— They're not anonymous. The letters on the record here— They're not anonymous. On the record, people who work with me at Vets for Freedom, Concerned Vets for America, and Fox News, attributing to me working hard every day on behalf of my mission.

One of your colleagues said that you got drunk at an event at a bar and chanted, kill all Muslims. Another colleague, not anonymous, we have this, said that you took coworkers to a strip club. You were drunk. You tried to dance with strippers. You had to be held off the stage and one of your employees in that Event filed a sexual harassment charge as a result of it. Now. I know you denied these things, but isn't that the kind of behavior that if true would be disqualifying for somebody to be secretary of defense.

Senator anonymous false charges. They're not anonymous and and I'll just conclude and say this to the chairman. You claim that this was all anonymous. We have seen records with names attached to all of these, including the name of your own mother. So don't make this into some anonymous press thing. We have seen multiple names of colleagues consistently throughout your career that have talked about your abusive actions. And I think he's over the time. He's way over his time now yield.

And thank you very much. I now asked unanimous consent to enter into The record a family court order concerning the appointment of parenting time. Between Mr. Hegseth and Mrs. Samantha Hegseth, it states that there were no claims of domestic abuse or probable evidence of abuse in the relationship. Without objection, that will be added to the record. And we we now We now move to Senator Kramer. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr Hague set for your service for your willingness to endure this and I'm sorry for what has been happening to you, particularly the very idea that you should have to sit there and answer hypothetical potential in somebody's imagination crimes that may take place at some point. And wouldn't that disqualify you? If you were a murderer or if you were a rapist? Unfair, unfair, and I'm embarrassed. For for this behavior. But first, I want to say thank you for your strong proclamation.

Unapologetic unapologetic proclamation of faith in Jesus Christ. I sat here and listen to your opening statement and thought, Wow, this is a guy who in today's culture is willing to stand up and say the first thing is first faith in Jesus Christ. And I was reminded of what Christ said in Matthew. Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness. And these things shall be added unto you. You are going to have a great future as our secretary.

And I look forward to that day happening. I also want to get back to you mentioned and it got rather dismissed quickly pivoted as a lot of things do. You'd mentioned that you were not able to serve with your National Guard unit in the protection of the inauguration of Joe Biden because of a tattoo a Christian tattoo. Can you elaborate just a little bit on what what what is this very offensive extremist racist tattoo that you you have? Uh, it's attached to I have right here, Senator. It's called the Jerusalem Cross. It's a historic Christian symbol.

In fact, interestingly, recently we I attended briefly the memorial ceremony of former President Jimmy Carter. On the floor of our National Cathedral on the front page of his program was the very same Jerusalem cross. It is a Christian religious symbol. And when the events happened before preceding the Biden inauguration, I was a part of the mobilization to defend that inauguration. As someone who'd been a proud supporter of Donald Trump, but also a member of

the military. Had orders to come to Washington, D. C. To guard that inauguration. And at the last minute, those orders were revoked. I've never had orders revoked before. I've been on orders to a lot of places to do a lot of difficult and dangerous things. They were revoked, and I was not told why. Later, when I wrote my book, I was able to get information that was because I had been identified. Someone who'd served in Iraq and Afghanistan in Guantanamo Bay holding a riot shield outside the White

House. I'd been identified as an extremist. Someone unworthy of guarding the inauguration of an incoming American president. And if that's happening to me, Senator, how many other men and women, how many other patriots, how many other people of conscience? We haven't even talked about COVID and the tens of thousands of service members who are kicked out because of an experimental vaccine. In President Trump's Defense Department, they will be apologized to. They will be reinstituted, reinstituted with pay and rank. Things like focusing on extremism, Senator, have created a climate inside our ranks that feel political when it has hasn't ever been political. Those are the types of things that are going to change.

And Senator Sullivan, you mentioned that study after a whole study was held. Extremism working group study. 100 extremists were identified in the ranks of three million. And most of those were gang related. You know, it was a made up boogeyman to begin with. You, Mr Hicks, are not the extremist. The people who would deny you your expression of faith are the extremists. They're the racists. They're the bigots. You're the one that is protecting their right to be one. Thank you for that. I want to go to your another point in your opening statement. And it's summarized in this beautiful one sentence paragraph. You said, quote, leaders at all levels will be held accountable and war fighting and lethality and the readiness of the troops and their families will be our

only focus at that moment in my mind's eye I heard soldiers airmen Marines sailors Guardians from the Pentagon to the Pacific and everywhere in between applaud applaud and they're thinking it's about time I can get on board with that idea and and quite honestly and and I want to get to this because I think it's so important I would say not I don't know just about every maybe everyone I'm trying to think of an exception to this that wears the uniform that has ever come before this committee or that I've met with privately publicly that I've been on tours with that I've traveled with that

wear the uniform whether it's with four stars or no stars agrees with that statement and I just want to caution you and I'd be interested in your feedback on this you know there's been a lot of talk about firing woke generals you're creating the purge group, and all those things you and I have talked about. I would say give those men and women a chance under new leadership. You know, my favorite painting in the rotunda is of George Washington retiring his commission, establishing on day one a man who could have been king, chose to be a civilian leader of this country.

And I just would encourage you to trust them first and look forward to them saluting the civilian leadership of this country. So just maybe if you could spend a minute just elaborating a little bit about the wokeness, where it comes from, and who will be held accountable. The wokeness comes not from the uniformed ranked, Senator, but from the political class. On day one, on January 20th, when President Trump is sworn in, he will issue a new set of lawful orders. And the leadership of our services will have an opportunity to follow those lawful orders or not. Those lawful orders will not be based on politics.

They will be based on readiness, accountability, standards, and lethality. That is the process by which leaders will be judged. And accountability is coming because everybody in this room knows if you're a rifleman and you lose your rifle, they're throwing the book at you. But if you're a general who loses a war, you get a promotion. That's not going to happen in Donald Trump's Pentagon. There will be real standards for success. Everyone from the top, from the most senior general to the most lowly private,

will ensure that they're treated fairly, men and women, inside that system. I also just want to commend you for your answers to Senator Fischer's questions about nuclear deterrence, but I also appreciate the fact that you emphasize reputational deterrence, because deterrence is not a weapon system. It is an attitude, and you project an attitude of deterrence. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Senator Kramer. Senator King. Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Mr Hesick. Well, welcome to the committee. Thank you, Senator. You've made several references to your religion

today. I share that Devotion to Christianity. But I must say I've been reminded somewhat of Saul on his way to Damascus. You seem to have been converted. Over the last several weeks and several months. You wrote in your book just last year that, but if we're going to, this is the book War on Warriors, but if we're going to send our boys to fight, and it should be boys, we need to unleash them to win. Later on, our boys should not fight by rules written by dignified men.

Which is it? Is it is it only boys can fight? I mean, you've you've testified here today that you believe in women in combat. But you didn't just last year. How do you explain your conversion? Senator? My testimony is clear. Um, writing a book is different than being Secretary of Defense. And I look forward to leading the men and women of our military. And my comment there, Senator, was about the burdensome rules of engagement that members of our generation, men and women, have seen on the battlefield.

And one thing President Trump changed in meaningful ways that led to meaningful developments on the battlefield when President Trump took control in the first term. ISIS was raging across Iraq and is someone who spent a lot of time there. With with other men and women who invested in that mission. It was a very difficult moment to see the black flag of ISIS fly. And what President Trump did. I appreciate you tie the hands of war fighters. He changed the rules of engagement, untied the hands of warfighters and

allowed them to complete their mission and crush ISIS. It has not just tactical implications, operational and strategic implications. How you allow warfighters to go about winning and fighting their wars. President Trump understands that and within the laws of war and the uniform code of military justice. We are going to unleash Warfighters to win wars so that wars don't drag on forever as our generation has seen so are you rejecting title 18 and and title 42 i think also has provisions that incorporate the geneva convention and the laws of armed combat are you saying that those laws should be repealed? That is the law of the land right

now. Senator. We have laws on the books from the Geneva conventions into the uniform code of military justice. And then underneath that you have layers in which Standard or temporary rules of engagements are put into place. We fight enemies also, Senator, as our generation understands, that play by no rules. They use civilians as human shields. They target women and children. We don't do that. We follow rules. We follow rules, but we don't need burdensome rules of

engagement that make it impossible for us to win these wars. And that's what President Trump understands. You're saying we follow rules, but we don't have to follow the rules in all cases. Is that correct? Senator, I'm making an important tactical distinction that warfighters will understand that there are the rules we swear an oath to defend, which are incredibly important, and this committee understands and helps set them.

And then there are those echelons above reality from, you know, corps to division to brigade to battalion, and by the time it trickles down to a company or a platoon or a squad level, you have a rules of engagement that nobody recognizes. And then it makes you incredibly difficult to actually do your job on the battlefield. That's the kind of assessment and look that an Army major will give to this process if I was confirmed to be the Secretary of Defense. Your quote is—

A true understanding of that. Your quote in 2024, Our boys should not fight by rules written by dignified men in mahogany rooms 80 years ago. That would be the Geneva Convention. America should fight by its own rules, and we should fight to win or not go in at all. Are you saying that the Geneva Convention provisions, which which clearly outlaw torture of prisoners. Do not should not apply in the future. Senator how we treat our

wounded, how we treat our prisoners. The applications of the Givina conventions are incredibly important, but we would all have to acknowledge that the way we fought our wars back when the Geneva Conventions were written are a lot different than the asymmetric non-conventional environment of counterinsurgency that I confronted in Iraq and Afghanistan. I was the senior counterinsurgency instructor in Afghanistan. My job was to understand how the Taliban and Al Qaeda operated so that NATO units coming in could be informed of what was happening. They knew

our rules of engagement and when they were more restrictive they took advantage of them and it put our men and women in a more dangerous and difficult place. For future wars we fight, we need to have someone atop the Pentagon, sir, who understands how those ripple effects impact the men and women in the war. I just want to understand your position. Your position is torture's okay. Is that correct? Waterboarding torture is no longer prohibited given the circumstances of whatever war we're in. Is that correct? Senator, that is not what I said. I've never been party to torture. We are a country that fights by the rule of law and our men and women always do. And yet we have too many people here in air conditioned offices that like to point fingers at the guys in dark and

dangerous places, the gals in helicopters in enemy territory who are doing things that people in Washington, D.C. would never dare to do or send in many cases. In one of your interviews, you said they're willing to do this. You're talking about Donald Trump and Trump and Senator Cruz. They're willing to do something like waterboarding if it's going to keep us safe. Are you okay with waterboarding? Senator The law of the land is that waterboarding is not legal. So the statement that you made you now recant. Is that correct? They are willing to do something like waterboarding if it's going to keep us safe. You express that with approval.

Senator. I'm very familiar with that as a concept, having spent a year at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, guarding 700 of those that attacked us on 9 11. I just want to be clear. Are we are we going to abide by the by the Geneva Convention and the prohibitions on torture, or are we not? Is it going to have circumstances as I've stated multiple times. The Geneva Conventions are what we base ours, but we're but an American first national security policy is not going to do. Is hand its prerogatives over to international bodies that's make decisions about how our men and women

make decisions on the battlefield America first understands we send Americans for a clear mission and a clear objective we equipped them properly for that objective we give everything they need and then we stand behind them with the rules of engagement that allow them to fight decisively to defeat America's enemies, which is why we sit quietly and peacefully in this conference room. I just have a few seconds left, Mr. Huffington, if you could. I was very disturbed in your opening statement where you talked about the priorities that you have. We will work with our partners and allies to deter aggression in the Indo Pacific from the communist Chinese. There's not a single mention in this statement about Ukraine or Russia. Is this code for we're going to abandon Ukraine? Senator, the president. This is that's a presidential level policy decision. He's

made it very clear that he would like to see a end to that conflict. We know who the aggressor is. We know who the good guy is. We'd like to see it as advantageous for the Ukrainians as possible, but that war needs to come. You talk a lot about deterrence of China. I would submit that Xi Jinping is watching what we do very carefully. If we abandon Ukraine, that would be the strongest single possible to Xi Jinping that he can take Taiwan without significant resistance from this country. Thank you, Senator King. Senator Scott of Florida. Mr Chairman. I'd like to enter into the record two letters, which testify

to Mr Hedges. Leadership record at concerned Veterans for America. The first letter submitted by Mr Darren Selnick, a senior advisor at CFA, stated that there's been no better leader, policy champion or fighter for the military and veterans and Pete. He was instrumental in 2014 and 2017 in ensuring that veterans had health care choice. The second letter submitted by Mr Cason Sparrow, digital media director of CVA from 2015 to 2017 stated.

Pete brought incredible energy, focus and a clear vision to the organization and showed everything that the team accomplished together. And I, um, similarly asked to submit to the record a letter from Paul J. Roberts, retired Colonel U. S Army Special Forces, speaking to the unwavering integrity of Mr Hegseth. Is there is their objection without objection. Those three will be admitted. Senator Scott. First. Congratulations on your nomination. Thank you, Senator, and thank you for being willing to serve our nation.

Um, I served in the Navy. I'm really proud of my dad. He was crazy. He did awful combat jumps with the second airborne. He after that survived all that fought in the battle of the bulge and what they went through. It was hell. So I have a lot of respect for him and for everybody that puts on the uniform and serves in battle and has to lead people in battle because it Been on ship that didn't happen to me, but I had a lot of friends

that happened to him. I could have to my dad. I've certainly on this committee for six years, two years under President Trump in the past foreigner, President Joe Biden. I've seen how the Biden Harris administration pushed the D O D to prioritize wokeness over being the most lethal military force in the world. It's our readiness or national security and our ability to recruit people who are willing to put their lives on the line for our country. Can you talk about some of

the changes we can make to improve recruitment and rebuild our military into the most lethal force in the world? First of all, Senator, thank you for the question. Thank you for your time. I think the first and most important thing we could have done is elect Donald Trump as the new commander in chief because past his prologue, our war fighters understand what kind of commander in chief they're going to get in President Donald Trump. Someone who stands behind them, someone who gives them clear missions, someone who ends wars decisively. And the issue of Ukraine was mentioned and ensures new wars are not started. There was a minor incursion under Barack Obama into Crimea, followed by nothing under President Trump, followed by an all out assault by Vladimir Putin into Ukraine under the Biden administration. That did not happen under Donald Trump. Donald Trump managed the Taliban under the Biden administration. Afghanistan collapsed tragically, ending in the lives of 13 at Abbey Gate, who we remember every single day. And no one was held accountable for that. Chinese spy balloons were flying over the country. None of that happened under Donald Trump and our war fighters understand that. So there's no better recruiter in my mind for our military than President Donald Trump. My job is to come alongside him should I be confirmed and continue to emphasize

his emphasis on war fighting, on getting anything that doesn't contribute to meritocracy out of how decisions are made inside the Pentagon. What gender you are, what race you are, your views on climate change, or whether you are a person of conscience and your faith should have no bearing on whether you get promoted or whether you're selected to go to West Point or whether you graduate from Ranger School. The only thing that should matter is how capable are you at your job? How excellent are you at your job? I served in multi-ethnic units in every place that I I were every place that I serve. None of that mattered. But suddenly we re inject. D E I and critical race theory dividing troops into different categories oppressor and oppressed in ways that they otherwise just want to work together. That's why I've pointed out before, and I'll say it again, because I'm sure it'll be quoted to me at some point, the dumbest phrase in military history is our unity is our strength.

No, our shared purpose is our strength. Our shared mission is our strength. We are one DOD community of all committed to the same mission. It has nothing to do with your background. Has to do with what you what your commitment is to the country. And that is my solemn pledge to every single person that would put the uniform on and reflects President Trump's priorities as well. Senator. Thank you. You know, we talked a little bit about the fact the Pentagon can't can't do an audit. All right.

Um, can you talk about and made to me that I've run big businesses. It's all about accountability. If you want to get an audit done, you can get an audit done. You might get a letter saying there's things you have to fix, but it all goes to accountability and we haven't had it. So can you talk about what how what you bring out? What do you how you bring accountability to the table? What you've done in the past and what you're going to do with regard to bringing accountability to the Pentagon.

I meant it when I said it in the opening statement, Senator. I know what I don't know. I know I've never run an organization of's leadership of people and motivation of people and a clear vision of people where you build a team, cast that vision, empower people properly. I want smarter and more capable people around me than me. And you will get that at the department. I cast the clear vision, build the plan, work it. We set the metrics and everyone is held accountable. I know our business, incoming businessman president believes in accountability and holding people accountable. That will happen at the Pentagon. I mean, this has been a problem for a long time. Secretary Rumsfeld gave a speech on September 10th, 2001. That's mostly forgotten. But it was about the need for acquisition reform, cutting cutting tail to give to teeth to warfighters. And then 9-11 happened and these are problems that have been persistent for a long time. But now we have new threats and we need the urgency of this moment. As you said Mr. Chairman, the most dangerous moment we've been since the end of the Cold War and possibly since World War II.

The urgency to do everything possible to get the capabilities into the hands of warfighters, emergency powers, Defense Production Act, whatever it takes, and an audit is certainly part of it. Why do you want to do this? Why do you want to do this job? What drives you? You have 30 seconds. Because I love my country, Senator, and I've dedicated my life to the war fighters.

People see me as someone who hosts a morning show on television. But people that really know me know where my heart's at. It's with the guys in this audience who've had my back and I've had theirs. We've been in some of the darkest and most difficult places you can ever be in. You come back a different person. And only by the grace of God am I here before you today. I'm doing this job.

For them. All of them. Thank you, Mr. Higgs. Senator Warren. Thank you, Mr Chairman and Mr Hegsa. Thank you. Thank you for your service. So if you're confirmed as secretary of defense, you will oversee our military, including about a quarter of a million women who currentlyifies you from serving in this role. Now, I've been trying to get answers from you for quite some time on this. You haven't wanted to meet or to answer any of my questions, so we'll just have to do it here and dive in. I want to pick up on some of the questions asked by Senators Shaheen and Gillibrand and Hirono, and I just want to make sure we have a list of some of the facts that I think are undisputed. I'm not going to talk about anonymous sources. I'm just going to quote you

directly. We've got the video. We've got it in print. So going back to January 2013, you told a Fox News interviewer that women in the military simply couldn't measure up to men in the military, saying that allowing women to serve in combat roles would force the military to lower the bar. You picked up on that same theme in 2015, making remarks on Fox News, referring to women in combat as, quote, a road. It would erode standards. June 2024, you said on Ben Shapiro's podcast, quote, Women shouldn't be in combat at all. And then, of course, we've talked about it in 2024. He published book. And you say on page 26 of your book, We need moms, but not in the military, especially

in combat units. Page 48 of your book, you claim that women should not be in combat roles because men are distracted by women. And then 10 weeks ago, you appeared on the Sean Ryan show and said, I'm straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. Now, I presume you recall making all these statements. When does fast grocery delivery through Instacart matter most? When your famous grainy mustard potato salad isn't so famous without the grainy mustard. When the barbecue's lit, but there's nothing to grill.

When the in-laws decide that, actually, they will stay for dinner. Instacart has all your groceries covered this summer. So download the app and get delivery in as fast as 60 minutes. Plus enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders. Service fees, exclusions, and terms apply. Instacart, groceries that over-deliver. Senator, I'm not familiar with the article you're pointing to in 2013, but it underscores my argument completely because in that 2013 argument, I was talking about standards. standards are what it's always been about. Have the same side always been about. I quoted you directly. We've got the video.

We're happy to show it. But I want to be clear here for 12 years. You were quite open about your views and your views were consistently the same. Women are inferior soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen and guardians. And in case anyone missed the point, and these are your words, you are not the same. Women are inferior soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen and guardians. And in case anyone missed the point, and these are your words from 10 weeks ago, women absolutely straight up should not be permitted to serve in combat. And I notice on each of these quotes, those are said without

qualification. It's not by how much you can lift or how fast you can run. They don't belong in combat period or your words straight up. And then on November 9th, 2024, just 32 days after your last public comments saying that women absolutely should not be in comment. You declared that quote some of our greatest warriors are women. And you support having them serve in combat. Now. That is a very, very big about face in a very, very short period of time. So help me understand,. Hegseth. What extraordinary event happened in that 32 day period that made you change the core values you had expressed for the preceding 12 years.

Senator again. I very much appreciate you bringing up my comments from 2013 because for me, this issue has always been about standards. And unfortunately, because of some of the people that have been political power for the last four years, priorities other than standards, lethality and meritocracy have driven decision making. Quoting you from the podcast. Women shouldn't be in combat at all. Where is the reference to standards that they should be there if they can carry, if they can run? I don't see that at all, Mr. Hegseth. What I see is there's a 32 day period in which you suddenly have another

description about your views of women in the military. And I just want to know what changed in the 32 days that the song you sang is not the song you come in here today to sing. Senator, the concerns I have and the concerns of many have had, especially in ground combat units is that in pursuit of certain percentages or quotas standards have been changed, and that makes the combat more difficult. About what happened in that 32 days. You got a nomination from President Trump. Now I've heard of deathbed

conversions, but this is the first time I've heard of the nomination conversion, and I hope you understand that many women serving in the military right now might think that if you can convert so rapidly your long held and aggressively pursued views in just 32 days. That 32 days after you get confirmed, maybe you'll just reverse those views and go back to the old guy who said straight up women do not belong in combat. Now Mr Hegstaff, you have written that after they retire, generals should be banned from working for the defense industry for 10 years.

You and I agree on the corrosive effects of the revolving door between the Pentagon and defense contractors. It's something I would have liked to talk to you about if you'd come and been willing to visit with me. But the question I have for you on this is, will you put your money where your mouth is and agree that when you leave this job, you will not work for the defense industry for 10 years. Senator. It's not even a question I've thought about because it's not about it right now. It's not one. My motivation for this job. I understand that. I just need a guess. We know we come next time

is short. I just need a yes or no. I would consult with the president about what the policy and other words. You're quite sure. That every general who serves should not go directly into the defense industry for 10 years. You're not willing to make that same pledge. I'm not a general senator. You'll be the one. Let us just be clear in charge of the generals. So you're saying

Sauce for the goose, but certainly not sauce for the candor. I would want to see what the policy that you think Thank you, Senator Warren. Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Mr Chairman, and thanks for your hard work and your committees. Hard work, Mr Chairman. This is this is gone. Well, that wasn't saying submit this letter. Topic conduct at vets for freedom for Hexeth. I'd like to submit that for the record, please. Without objection, General Hexeth.

I mean, Mr Hexeth. Think Thanks for being here today and with your family. I know this is tough. That's what it's all about, though. You're a tough guy. Been here for a while. Never seen this many people that here for support. Of a nominee. That's impressive. I met with a lot of them yesterday.

And they are very passionate. So thank you for willing to take this on and congratulations on your nomination. Uh I'm worried about recruiting. I mean, we can look at everything out there and talk about all these things. These narratives.

But at the end of the day, I came from a team sport. We were the people the players actually won the game. And that's what's gonna happen here. You're not gonna win the game. Now you're gonna set the precedent. You're gonna get the blame or the credit. But there's going people that's gonna be under you. That's gonna set the precedent for the future of our country. Now, uh, the war games that we play on our computers with our adversaries right now.

For us. It don't look good. Because our military We're in trouble. Our whole country's in trouble. Thank God, President Trump got elected November the fifth. We couldn't kept down the same path. We could not that could not happen. I met with the general couple of generals this summer coach. We're spending more money on transgender restrooms than we are coverings for $100 million airplanes.

That's not acceptable. We can't do that. That's not what this is about. Met with a couple of Navy SEALs not too long ago. They just got back from crawling around in the mud and a muck. Overseas unknown places couldn't tell you where they've been carrying a weapon, obviously protecting us and our allies. And the first week they're back. What they do. They had to go through a week of D E training. Both are now out. They give it up.

It was embarrassing to him of what they had to do. We've lost all sight of what we're doing in our military lost all sight. It starts with leadership. And it starts with recruiting. Why would a young man used to when I was growing up? If you couldn't afford to go to college, you had the opportunity to go the military where you could learn to trade. You could learn you could make a living for your family and eventually possibly get an education. That was a good alternative.

We've forgotten that we've forgotten that we can't give up on our young people. Young people are number one commodity in this country, and they're the ones that's going to live and die for the freedom of this country in the future. So again, thank you for taking this on recruiting. Our service academies. Are meant to serve as our primary commissioning source of officers. It now appears that they are a breeding ground for less leftist

activists and champions of D and critical theory. Not all. But some and some is way too much. Uh, how are we going to eliminate this? Mr. Exit? How are we going to get this back on track to where we We grow our leaders. I had a young man that for every wanted to go to West Point. I got him a nomination. I got him accepted and he turned it down. He says, Coach. I'm not getting involved with that mess. How are

we going to overcome this? Senator. Thank you for the question. And I think it comes down to leadership. Clear leadership from President Trump through me, should I be nominated? And that's what soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and guardians see, is clear leadership. It says, this is what we believe. This is the mission we're going to give you. Here's the equipment we're going to give you, and here's how we're going to support you.

Because the military, at a lot of levels, Senator, has been for generations a family business. My grandfather served, my father served, I served, my daughter served. That chain has started to break with generations of people my age and older talking to their kids and grandkids, wondering, pondering, do I want them to serve? Will my country use them responsibly? When that kind of doubt is cast, you get serious recruiting problems like we do right now. You get questions about whether I want my son or daughter to follow my path in West Point, which I've heard multiple times. Would I want my? And so you have to rip root and branch the politics and divisive policies

out of these institutions and then focus them on creating and preparing actual future military leadership. West Point traditionally is focused on engineering and rightfully so, because in our fighting forces across all services, we need the best and brightest minds in engineering. In addition to military studies, that's what I did at ROTC at Princeton, military science. And we need more uniformed members going back into West Point, the Air Force Academy, the Naval Academy, as a tour to teach with their wisdom of what they've learned in uniform, instead of just more civilian professors that came from the same left-wing woke universities that they left, and then try to push that into service academies when that changes senator. I truly

believe under Donald Trump. We will have a recruiting Renaissance that sends signals to the world. To our enemies and our allies alike that is America's back and thankfully, then we have the men and women of our country willing to want to serve. Thank you. And it's about attitude to I love your attitude. You've got to be motivated. You've got to understand that people They will They will hook up with motivated. You've got to understand the people. They will. They will hook up with you. They will understand and learn

under their leaders. Why would you fight for a country that you don't love? That's what I keep hearing from a lot of our college kids that they getting from they're getting from these woke universities that they go to now, and I worked at a lot of That is one of the excuses I get from our kids. We've got to break that. No one, according to the Pentagon between 2001 and 2024. The number of civilian employees in the office of the secretary of defense

has nearly double from 1500 to 3000. Civilians on Joint Chiefs has increased from 191 to almost 1000. Our military in strength goes down. Our staff numbers are exploding. What are you gonna do about that? Senator. We're going to address that. We won World War Two with seven four star generals. Today we have 44 four star generals. There's an inverse relationship between the size of staffs and

victory on the battlefield. We don't need more bureaucracy at the top. We need more war fighters empowered at the bottom. So it's going to be my job working with those that we hire and those inside the administration to identify those places where fat can be cut so it can go toward lethality. Thank you, Senator Tuberville. Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr Chairman strikes off. Welcome to this committee.

Thank you. You know that we have far too much partisanship in our country right now. Think it's eating away at the fabric of what has always made this country great about bringing people together from all sorts of backgrounds, all sorts of experiences. And we know that in our motto, together as one, we are strong. And so we and this committee, and certainly I speak for myself, but I think I speak for many of my colleagues, want to take partisanship out of this proceeding as much as we can.

I'm not naive. It's out there. I get it. But we've got to try to take that out. And I want you to know that as a member of this committee, I have voted in a bipartisan way for secretaries of defense. I voted for two secretaries of defense when Donald Trump was previously president. We had those two. We had, I think, five total secretaries of defense during that four-year period. So we want to keep that in mind as to what we might see in this coming administration. But I voted, and we voted by a big margin for those folks as well. But part of that was the process and having an opportunity to get to know the person and understand their qualifications and understand the standards. You know, I made repeated requests to meet with you prior to this meeting.

I know many of my other colleagues also wanted to meet with you. I did that with the other nominees that I was happy to vote for. I thought they were highly qualified individuals and true professionals, and yet I could never get a meeting with you. Was there a reason you were afraid to have one-on-one meetings with some of my colleagues before the hearing? Senator, I know there was a great deal of outreach to multiple offices. Schedules get full. There's a lot going on. I was ready. I welcome the opportunity I was running my schedule to have an opportunity to sit down I was ready it would have been so much better to have that opportunity to talk beforehand I think that's a big mistake and it doesn't set us on a good

course when you refuse to meet with people and have a professional conversation about the huge challenges that we face at the Department of Defense my colleagues the folks who introduced you and others, the chairman has mentioned about the management of the DOD is a concern, cost overruns, delays on weapons systems. We need strong management at the Department of Defense, first and foremost. We've got to have someone who's going to grab the reins and give the taxpayers value for having the most lethal fighting force in the world that defends freedoms. But we've got to do it in an efficient way. I've heard about the jobs you've had in the past. Let's just talk about qualifications. I know you had two previous positions. How many people reported to you in those positions?

Senator, at Vets for Freedom, we were a small upstart. Our focus was working on Capitol Hill, going back to the battlefield to support war fighters. Just the number, please. We probably had eight to ten full-time staff and lots of volunteers. So you had eight. Has there been any other? We've heard about the two, and certainly there's been a lot of talk about the mismanagement, et cetera, et cetera. I'm just curious.

I won't go into that. Just curious. So you had eight there have you what's the largest number of people you've ever supervised or had in an organization in your career not three million so I don't expect that no one very few people have ever had that experience but how many it's a good straight-up question I think we had over a hundred full-time staff at Concern Vets for Vets for America roughly with thousands of volunteers.

I was also a headquarters company commander, which would have been a couple of hundred. Nothing remotely near the size of the Defense Department, I would acknowledge that. Actually, not remotely near even a medium-sized company in America, let alone a big company in America, especially a major corporation. And you're basically we're hiring you to be the CEO of one of the most complex, largest organizations in the world. We're the board of directors here. I don't know of any corporate board of directors that would hire a CEO for a major company if they came and said, You know, I supervised 100 people before. They'd ask you, well, what kind of experiences you had? We need innovation. Can you give me an experience or your actual experience of driving innovation in an organization? Give me an example of where you have done that. Oh, my goodness, Senator. Absolutely. At Concerned Veterans for America, we created the Fixing Veterans Healthcare Task Force, a bipartisan task force that had never been done before to create policy, to drive policy change on Capitol Hill that organizations

fought ferociously against. We got the VA Accountability Act passed and the Mission Act passed in a way that a nonprofit, far-sized veterans organization has never done. And that's testified in all the letters that we put forward to the committee, which are on the record. MR. Thank you. Okay, I have limited time.

Thank you for that. Give me an example of where you've driven down cost. I've heard examples that Senator Blumenthal gave. The cost was a real problem for you in your 50-person organization, that you actually raised a lot less than what you actually spent. Did you drive costs down in a 50-person organization? Let me tell you, we've got to drive costs down dramatically in an organization of three million people and hundreds of billions of dollars.

You don't have that experience that you can talk about. To me, this is our acquisition reform. Acquisition reform, you bring that up. Have you had experience in acquisition reform? I've written about and studied on acquisition reform for quite some time. Have you actually done it? Because what we need in the hands of our war fighters better change because we're not doing it well right now.

It better. And we need people who have experience actually doing that. You talk about standards. Again, I'm going to go back to CEO of the most complex organization in the world. I don't think there's a board of directors in America that would hire you as a CEO with the kind of experience you have on your resume you talk about standards you talk about raising or low that we have a problem of Standards in the DoD and we have to raise standards for the men and women who serve

Do you think that the way to raise the minimum standards of the people who serve us is to lower the standards for the? Secretary of Defense, that we have someone who has never managed an organization, more than 100 people, is going to come in and manage this incredibly important organization and do it with a professionalism and has no experience that they can tell us that they have actually done that? I have real problems with that. This is not about other issues that are brought up. They're all very important

I'm just about trying to get things done managing efficiently and having the best people who have demonstrated that in a large organization And I'm sorry, but I don't see that in your background. There are a lot of other things you can do very well You're a capable person But I'm not I do not you have not convinced me that you're able to take on this tremendous responsibility with a complex organization and having little or no significant management experience. Senator, I'm grateful to be hired by one of the most successful CEOs in American history, should I be confirmed. Mr. Haig said that it seems to me that you've supervised

Far more people than the average United States senator supervises typically. And, um, except for former governors, Mr Chairman, Senator Mullen. I understand you are yielding back your time and do not wish to ask question. I was I was misinformed. Am I? Senator Mullen. Okay. Cut me totally off guard there. I'd like to submit for the record signatures by 32 members of the House representatives who are veterans.

The signatures call on the Senate to honor the constitutional duty of advising consent by conducting a fair, thorough confirmation process that evaluates his nomination solely on the substance and merits. His distinguished military service, academic credentials and a bold vision for revitalizing the national fence. I see unanimous consent to enter into the record without objection. Um, you know, there's a lot of talk going about talking about

qualifications and then about us hiring him if we are the board, but there's a lot of senators here. I wouldn't have on my board. Because there is no qualifications except your age, and you got to be living in the state in your citizen of the United States to be a senator. In fact, we got to convince a lot of people to vote for us. And then when we start talking about qualifications, um for if

you're qualified for it, could the chairman tell me what the qualifications are for the secretary defense? This chairman. Could you tell me what the qualifications are for the secretary defense? I'd be happy for I'll read it for you to let me let me read it for you because I was getting some advice from my second in command, but I'm just I'm just making a point because there's a lot about qualifications. I think it's so hypocritical of senators, especially on the other

side. I'll be talking about his qualifications, not about lead. The secretary or be the secretary of defense. And yet your qualifications aren't any better. You guys aren't any more qualified to be the senator than I'm qualified to be the senator, except we're lucky enough to be here. But let me read you what the qualifications of the secretary of defense is, because I Googled it and I Googled it and went through a lot of different sites. And really, it's hard to see. But in general, the U. S. Secretary of defense position is filled by a civilian. That's it. If you have served in the U. S Army forces and I've been in the service for you have to be retired for at least seven years in Congress can can weigh that. And then there's questions that my that the senator from From Massachusetts brought up about serving on a on a board.

Inside the military industry and yet your own secretary that you all voted for Secretary of Austin. We had to vote on a waiver because he stepped off the border Raytheon. But I guess that's okay, because that's a Democrat secretary defense. But we so quickly forget about that. And then Senator Kane or I guess I better use the senator from Virginia starts bringing up the fact that what if you showed up drunk to your job? How many senators have showed up drunk to vote at night?

Have any of you guys asked them to step down and resign for their job? And don't tell me you haven't seen it because I know you have. And then how many senators do you know have got a divorce before cheating on their wives? Did you ask them to step down? No. But it's for show. You guys make sure you make a big show and point out the hypocrisy because the man's made a mistake. And you want to sit there and say that he's not qualified. Give me a

joke. It is so ridiculous that you guys hold yourself as this higher standard. You forget you got a big plank in your eye. We've all made mistakes. I've made mistakes and Jennifer. Thank you for loving him through that mistake. Because the only reason why I'm here and not in prison is because my wife loved me too. I have changed, but I'm not perfect. But I found somebody that thought I was perfect and for for whatever reason, you love Pete, and I don't know why.

But just like our Lord and Savior forgave me, my wife's had to forgive me more than once, too. And I'm sure you've had to forgive him, too. And so thank you. So before I go down this rabbit hole again, tell me something about your wife that you love. Um She's the smartest, most capable. Loving, humble. Honest person I've ever met.

In addition to being incredibly beautiful. Don't forget about your kids. I'm supposed to talk about my kids. No, no. Well, she's also the mother. Oh, an amazing mother. Yes of our blended family of seven brother. I'm pulling you along. I'm trying to help you here. You know, um Do you believe that you're going to be running the secretary or the Department of Defense by yourself.

Senator. Absolutely not. Just as President Trump is assembling his cabinet. I look forward and already M in the process of building one of the best possible teams you can imagine with decades and decades of experience. Outside the Pentagon driving innovation. And excellence and also inside the building knowing how to make it happen. Yes, sir. Outside the Pentagon driving innovation. And excellence and also inside the building knowing how to make it happen. Yes, sir.

So, um And your organizations that you did have the privilege of running. Did you have a board? That you in both organizations. We had a board. Yes. Okay. And what did you do with that board? What kind of decisions that you make with him? Those boards provided oversight and insight into decision making. They all have special, unique sets that maybe filled gaps that you're

not the expertise in. Yes, sir. So do you believe you're capable of surrounding yourself with capable individuals? That you're going to be able to run those same ideas by And surround yourself with people that are smarter and better equipped and maybe areas that you don't you don't necessarily carry those expertise with. Senator. The only reason I've had success in life to include a wonderful

wife is because of people more capable around me and having the self confidence to empower them and say, Hey, run with the ball, run with the football. Take it down the field. We'll do this together. I don't care who gets the credit. And in this case, that's how the Pentagon will be run. Let me listen with this, Mr Chairman about the qualifications. You got a man who has literally put his butt on the line.

He served 20 years in service, multiple deployments. Has heard the bullets crack over the top of his head. Has been willing to go into combat. Been willing to see Friends Die for this country. He's willing to still put himself through this. His wife is willing to still stand beside him, knowing he wasn't perfect, knowing that all this was going to be brought up. He still willing to serve the country.

What other qualifications does he need? That I yield back. Thank you, Senator Mullen, Senator Duckworth and again, we we really are going to strictly enforce the rule about no demonstrations or noise. The distinguished ranking member. Just a point of personal privilege to make a correction. The reason that General Austin required a waiver was not because of his participation in a corporate enterprise. It was because he did not have seven years of interruption between his service and his appointment. Second point is that if any of us were appointed as Secretary of Defense we would be subject to the same types of questions and the case in point is Senator John Tao was nominated for Secretary of Defense.

It was discovered by his colleagues that his behavior was not commensurate with the responsibilities despite his service and he was voted down. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Senator Duckworth you are recognized. Thank you Mr. Chairman and also Secretary matters had to have this waiver as well. Um Mr Hex said this hearing is about whether you are qualified to be secretary of defense and one of the qualifications to answer my colleagues question is to actually win the votes of every member of this committee and to be confirmed by the United States Senate and you need to convince us that you're worthy of that vote because the

people of the state of Illinois voted for me to be their senator so that I could cast that vote when it comes to picking who is going to be the next Secretary of Defense. This hearing now seems to be a hearing about whether or not women are qualified to serve in combat and not about whether or not you are qualified to be Secretary of Defense. And let me just say that the American people need a sec def who's ready to lead on day one. You are not that person. Our adversaries watch closely during times of transition. And any sense that the Department of Defense that keeps us safe is being steered by someone who's wholly unprepared for the job puts America at risk. And I am not willing to do that. With that in mind, Mr. Hexeth, I want you to try to explain to the American people, this committee, who have to vote for you, and to our troops who are deployed around the world, why you are qualified to lead the Department of Defense. We already know that you've only led

on the largest of 200 person organization. We already know that you so badly mangled a budget that after you left, they had to bring in a forensic accountant to figure out what went wrong. And the largest budget you ever managed was about $18 billion. You know that is about 51,58 times smaller than the defense budget. Please describe to me, Mr. Hexeth, you talk about DOD passing an audit. Please describe to me a time or an organization that you led underwent an audit. Because you say you're going to hire smarter people than you to run this audit. I'm not asking you to be an accountant. I want you to be able to tell me what kind of guidance will be given to those employees, what will happen if whether or not you pass that audit. Have you led an audit of any organization? Yes or no? I don't want a long answer. Yes or no? Have

you led an audit of any organization of which you were in charge? Senator, in both of the organizations I ran, we were always completely fiscally responsible. Yes or no, did you lead an audit? Yes or no, did you lead an audit? Yes or no? What are you afraid of? You can't answer this question. Yes or no, did you lead an audit?

Do you not know this answer? Senator, every part of my leadership of these organizations has been misrepresented. I will take that as a no. What were the findings? So there were no findings because you've never led an audit. What guidance did you give the auditors? None, because you've never led an audit. Nobody expects you to be an accountant, Mr. Hexath.

What we expect is for you to understand the complexity of this Pentagon budget process that is absolutely necessary to outfit our war fighters. Look, the Secretary of Defense is required to make quick decisions every single day that, well, with high-level information that's being provided for them. A Secretary of Defense has to have breadth and depth of knowledge. Right now, I am concerned that you have neither. Mr. Hexteth, what is the highest level of international negotiations that you have engaged in, that you have led in? Because the Secretary of Defense does lead international security negotiations. There are three main ones that the Secretary of Defense leads and signs. Can you name at least one of them?

MR. Could you repeat the question, Senator? MS. Sure. What is the highest level of international security agreement that you have led? And can you name some that the Secretary of Defense would lead? There's three main ones. Do you know?

MR. I have not been involved in international security arrangements because I have not been in government other than serving in the military. So my job has been to lead men and women in combat. So no, the answer is can you name one of the three main ones that the Secretary of Defense signs? You're talking about defense arrangements. I mean, NATO might be one that you're referring to. Status of Forces Agreement would be one of them.

Status of Forces Agreement. I've been a part of teaching about Status of Forces Agreements. But you don't remember to mention it? You're not qualified, Mr. Hexeth. You're not qualified. You talk about repairing our defense industrial complex. You're not qualified to that. You could do the acquisition and cross-servicing agreements, which essentially are security agreements.

You can't even mention that. You've done none of those. You talked about the Indo-Pacific a little bit, and I'm glad that you mentioned it. Can you name the importance of at least one of the nations in ASEAN and what type of agreement we have with at least one of those nations? And how many nations are in ASEAN, by the way? I couldn't tell you the exact amount of nations in that, but I know we have allies in South Korea and Japan and in August with Australia and trying to work on submarines with them. Mr. Hexall, none of those countries are in ASEAN. None of those three countries that you've mentioned are in ASEAN.

I suggest you do a little homework before you prepare for these types of negotiations. Listen. Mr Hexel. This is We ask our troops to go into harm's way all the time. We asked him to go into harm's way and this behind me is a copy of the soldiers Creed, a copy that usually hangs over my desk here in the Senate, and you should be familiar with it. It's the same copy that hung over my desk at Walter Reed every single day that I woke up and fought my way back because I wanted to go back and serve next to

my buddies who saved my life. These same the same copy these words I repeated over and over and over again and let me read out two things to you two sentences. I will always place the mission first and I am disciplined physically and mentally tough trained and proficient in my warrior task. Mr. Hexeth, our troops follow these words every single day and they man up and they pack their rucksacks and they go to war and they deserve a leader who can lead them, not a leader who wants to lower the standards for himself or raising the standards for other people. And by the way, our troops already meet the standards. We ask troops to man that ship, fight that fire, fly that helicopter until their very last breath. And they do that every single day.

They cannot be led by someone who's not competent to do the job. How can we ask these warriors to train and perform the absolute highest standards when you are asking us to lower the standards to make you the Secretary of Defense simply because you are buddies with our president elect. And by the way, he has filed for bankruptcy six times. I'm not quite sure he's the kind of CEO you want to refer to as a successful businessman. Let me make it clear. You can't seem to grasp that there is no U. S military as we know

it without the incredible women that we serve. You can't seem to grasp that there is no U. S military as we know it without the incredible women that we serve. Women who earned their place in their units. You have not earned your place as Secretary of Defense. You say you care about keeping our armed forces strong and that you like that our armed forces of meritocracy. Then let's not lower the standards for you. You, sir are a no go at this station. Thank you, Senator Duckworth. I would like to submit for the record.

A letter submitted by Mr. Brian Marriott that says anyone who would claim that Pete mismanaged funds at Vets for Freedom is ignorant of the facts. Without objection, it will be admitted to the record. Senator, but Thank you, Chairman Wicker and congrats on your chairmanship of this committee. I want to thank you for your leadership and your handling of this today. I think you're doing a great job. So I wanted to also submit for the record a letter submitted by Mr. Daniel Catlin, the former operations manager at Vets for Freedom.

Mr Catlin's letter states that Mr Hegg Seth and Mr Catlin conducted weekly meetings to meticulously review every dollar that the organization spent. Pete's hands on approach and dedication to financial responsibility ensured that Vets for Freedom operated within its budget. Mr Catlin's letters also states that Pete treated his staff with the utmost respect, regardless of race or gender. So I asked unanimous consent to clear this into the record chairman without objection.

So ordered. Thank you. Mr Hegseth. Congratulations on your nomination. Thanks for appearing before the committee today. I enjoy meeting we in my office before Christmas, and I've enjoyed our friendship before that. You know, you stated in your advanced policy questions that the American people need to be informed, engaged and inspired. Join our military.

I wholeheartedly agree with that. We also have a problem, though, with obesity and falling academic standards. It's very concerning. We've talked about that before. So if confirmed, how would you approach increasing the number of Americans eligible to serve in the military, but without lowering standards? Senator. I think there are already to the credit of I believe the

army and other services have now caught up to that. Which have piloted programs that have had some success that have allowed young Americans who want to serve in the military but can't necessarily pass the ASFAB or pass the APFT to get into basic training an opportunity to get caught up or preparatory class. Unfortunately, yes, we do have a problem of obesity in our country, not necessarily something that the, if'm confirmed Secretary of Defense is able to address. But I do think leading from the front matters. I do think having a secretary of defense that will go out and do PT with the troops matters that has been out there and done that before. And hopefully that's a motivating factor for young people. But it the reality of obesity and

Criminal backgrounds and medical problems have long been an issue of recruitment in America, unfortunately What changed is the perception of military service? because of the condition of the services and frankly because of in some ways the way our schools don't teach young people to love the Country. And if you don't love the country, why do you want to serve that country? That's a deeper problem. But all of those things need to be addressed to revive recruiting and obesity. Certainly a part of it. Thank you for that. So I've had multiple conversations, young folks back in North Carolina, young men, young women. And we get to meet a lot of them. But you know, I hear from some of these folks who I encouraged to join the military. They say That they're concerned that it's become politicized and if confirmed,

would you commit to working with my office to address the military recruiting crisis and ensuring the military is focused on warfighting. Senator. Absolutely. A number one from day one with a mandate from the commander in chief. Um Who received that mandate when Americans spoke out loudly and said we want peace through strength. We want America first foreign policy and we don't want political ideology driving decisions inside our defense Department. That was clear. It's an infection that the American people are acutely aware of, which the men and women

in this room have lived firsthand. I've lived it firsthand. And that's why it will be a priority. And I truly believe, and I'm humbled by this, the response we've already seen from young men and women who've decided to join the military when they had said, I wasn't going to. But seeing a commander-in-chief, Donald Trump, reassured them. Seeing the possibility, if confirmed, of a secretary of defense that would have their

back reassured them. And so in the first couple of months after President Trump's election, we have already seen—the numbers are there—a recruiting surge in all the services that I would welcome the opportunity to continue, and it's humbling to think the families across this country would have confidence in us to deliver for their young men and women. There's no more important task. Thank you for that. So shifting gears a bit. I want to hear some of your thoughts on the growing fighter aircraft capacity gap with China and what this means for a potential fight in the Indo Pacific.

So if confirmed, what policy recommendations will you make to the president on procurement and maintenance of fourth and fifth generation fighters while we continue to research and develop sixth generation and collaborative combat aircraft? Senator, that's a very important conversation, one that I've been looking at a great deal. A lot of it, just to be clear, involves classifications and understanding precisely cost and capabilities, including capabilities of enemy systems, both not just fourth and fifth, but potential sixth generation, which we've already seen a prototype released from the Chinese. That's a dangerous development, considering at least the publicly understood condition Indo-Pacific, say operability range is going to matter because it's such a large battle space. That would all will all factor in decisions that are made. And that's where I feel, frankly, a little bit liberated that I didn't work at Lockheed or any number of pick a defense contractor. I didn't mean to point one out in particular. Pick any. I haven't.

I don't have a special interest in any particular system or any particular company or any particular narrative. I want to know what works. I want to know what defeats our enemies, what keeps us safe, what deters them, what keeps our enemies up at night. Whatever that is, I want more of it and I want to invest in it. And I know that's the view that President Trump has as well. Thank you. You know, some have commented recently. About the need to eliminate immediately a man manned aircraft. So I'd say maybe one day, but that day is not now and certainly not before 20 27, especially in the end of Pacific. So if confirmed, will you commit to work with my office in this committee

to ensure the proper mix of fighters, manned and unmanned? I look forward to working with you on that, Senator, because unmanned will be a very important part of the way future wars are fought. Just the idea of survivability for a human being drives cost and time in ways that unmanned systems do not. But I look forward to that conversation. Thank you, Senator. But I now recognize Senator Reid for unanimous consent request. This fear and I would ask him as sent the two letters be submitted for the record.

One letter signed by numerous organizations, including the government accountability project. The other signed by several organizations, including the Truman National Security Project. Without objection. So ordered. Now, Senator Kelly. Um Central Rosen got here after the gavel went down. Do you really want to go ahead of her? I am going to defer to my good friend and colleague, Senator Rosen. That, from the great state of Nevada.

That is a really good decision. Senator Rosen, you are recognized. And thank you, Senator Kelly. I owe you one. Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, for holding this hearing. And Mr. Hegseth, I appreciate your service and your willingness to serve again. However, I am deeply disappointed that you would not agree to meet with me as other members have said on this committee prior to this hearing, as is the precedent for this committee and others. So let me tell you a little bit about what I would have talked about had you made yourself available prior to the premier aviation training ranges for both the Air Force and the Navy. The largest ammunition depot in the world and the only place in the country where we are able to verify the reliability of our nuclear stockpile without the need for explosive

testing. The Nevada National Guard is one of the few only few units across the country with the mission of fighting wildfires. It's for another hearing and currently activated to fight the devastating fires around Los Angeles in support of our neighbors. We therefore play a critical role in our national security and the person who holds the position of secretary defense matters greatly to Nevada service members and our military equities.

But every single Person who serves in the military. We've talked about my colleagues esteemed colleagues have talked about recruitment and retention. One day they will become a veteran. So my veterans and the folks who are due serving active duty now are concerned about what you think. Do D does not have jurisdiction over Nevada's 200,000 plus veterans. But I am interested in your views about The service members once they've transitioned out of the military, given the influence you would have while they're in service of confirmed In 2019 on the segment of Fox and friends. You said that Veterans Service organizations. VSOs. I'm going to quote encourage veterans to apply for every government benefit they can ever get after they leave the service. You stated you don't want to quote be dependent on government assistance from the V A based on injuries or illnesses that might have arisen from your military service. So I'm just going to ask you a few yes or no questions about veterans understanding you don't have jurisdiction.

This is important to our morale is important to our recruitment and is important to our retention this is important to our morale, it's important to our recruitment, and it's important to our retention, and it is important to how we respect others in this country. So, yes or no please, do you believe that VSOs are wrong to support veterans in obtaining the benefits that they have rightfully earned and deserved when they sign that line like you did for your service? Senator, veterans deserve the benefits they've earned. I have been in many battles with traditional veteran service organizations over differences of opinion about how to deliver those services, including veterans choice. Do you believe VSOs are wrong? VSOs is a very broad term.

We were a VSO also, ma'am. But some of those services took a traditionally bureaucratic approach. Should they be able to help the veterans obtain the benefits that they have earned? Yes or no? Should anyone be able to help? Every veteran should have rapid access to all the benefits that they've earned. Do you believe that veterans should be ashamed for having sought and obtained the benefits that they have earned? Do you think veterans should be ashamed to seek out benefits?

Senator, I think you should be ashamed as a nation of the amount of veterans that commit suicide because they hit a brick wall. They commit suicide because they hit a brick wall of the bureaucracy of the VA. I'm going to move on. I'm going to take that as a yes. And the reformers are not courage enough to take it on. How about veterans who suffer lasting injuries or illnesses due to their military service? Do you think they deserve our support and assistance?

Your answers to these, they're too broad. People want to know, are you willing to support our veterans organizations that will help our veterans get every damn thing that they deserve because they signed on the dotted line to keep us safe, just like you did? I respect that. Will you? Senator, with all due humility, I don't know that there's anyone in this room over the last 20 years that have worked harder to ensure that our veterans are taken care of. It has been a passion of my life alongside with so many on this day is to make sure that veterans receive and it is a recruiting crisis. When veterans are not treated well on the government, they don't want to set veterans and daughters on the government. Do you believe that veterans getting these benefits are dependent on the government? Or do you believe it's a benefit they've earned

and deserve through their service? Mr. It's a benefit they've earned and a hand up to the next chapter of their life. Ms. But these are your words then. So you have again changed your position. Where you believe the veterans are dependent, now you believe they've earned and deserved it. I just think it's disrespectful to change that position.

These are benefits that people may need throughout their life and may not know when they need them. Or how they're going to need them, and they need to be there when they do. Thank you. I move on to my next question. Um, America's role in the world. Uh Our alliances, the threats America's facing their serious or wide ranging from China to Russia to Iranian backed terrorism. So do you agree with the national defense strategy that the U. S cannot compete with China, Russia and their partners alone and

certainly cannot win a war that way. And this is a quote from the national defense strategy. Is your interpretation that American first foreign policy is America alone. Does that include abandoning our allies and partners such as NATO, Taiwan, Israel and others. And if we can't win alone, and we don't strengthen our strategic partnerships, I would say that position your position places on a strategic path to lose to our adversaries. So maybe you're okay with choosing that path for America. I want to know

how you square that position with the positions you articulated in your book where you wrote that NATO is at relic at best a distraction and should be scrapped and remade. Are you okay with sending us down a path where we can't win? Senator. The world has had our friends in the world have had no better ally. Our allies and partners have had no better friend than President Donald Trump, who's reinvigorated a NATO alliance behind Israel in

every way in ways this administration has not. He has ensured that the NATO alliance has become far more robust. He worked with allies in the Pacificific as well is donald trump going to stand behind ukraine are you going to stand behind ukraine you say he's the strongest president president-elect trump said he will end the war in ukraine before he takes office okay so less than a week before he's inaugurated to the best of your knowledge do you have knowledge of a plan that he's going to use to rapidly end the war with ukraine Do you believe it's feasible that does not make unacceptable concessions to Vladimir Putin was a brutal dictator. And are you going to give

President like Trump military advice. That you have given others to achieve the objective. Um Of us winning the war in Ukraine. How do you think a rapid end of the war that Vladimir Putin started will affect the United States standing across the world. I think it's a very important question. Ukraine. How do you think a rapid end of the war that Vladimir Putin started will affect the United States standing across the world? Senator I will always give clear guidance. My clear guidance best guidance to the president United States on matters like that.

Do you think that if we concede to Vladimir Putin that that will hurt our credibility with Our allies and partners. And do you not believe that our adversaries are watching some? You can take that for the record. Mr Hexeth. Senator Schmidt. with our allies and partners? And do you not believe that our adversaries are watching? You can take that for the record. Mr. Hexeth, Senator Schmidt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to submit for the record a letter submitted by Mr. Christopher on the former director of operations for vets for freedom. Mr. On his letter states that the suggestion quote

the suggestion that funds were misused for personal gain, lavish parties or other improper purposes is categorically false. Throughout my time working with Pete Hegseff, he consistently demonstrated exceptional integrity and leadership. I asked unanimous consent to enter this letter into the record. Without objection, so ordered. Senator Schmidt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Hegseff. Good to see you here today. Thank you for your service. Thank you saying your willingness to serve. I also want to thank you for your clarity. In articulating the vision you have for the Department of Defense in restoring an ethos. Um, a warrior ethos. Uh, which is in stark contrast to the ethos we've seen the last four years, which is of weakness and wokeness. And I want to drill down on a few things specifically in exactly how we've gotten to where we've gotten with recruiting and morale.

DEI. There's been a little bit of discussion about this, but for those watching at home, DEI is not about giving everybody opportunity. It is rooted in cultural Marxism. The idea that you pit the room any room with oppressor versus oppressed. It's race essentialism, and it is poison. It has no business whatsoever in our military. I think the American people have spoken loudly and clearly about this. They're tired of this.

They're tired of woke ideology into my democrat colleagues on the other side. If you haven't picked up on that, you missed the plot. Because that's what November 5th partially was about. And so let's talk specifically about some of these D I programs that have been funded In our academy, specifically the Air Force Academy. It was advised. As disfavored language.

To refer to your mom and dad as mom and dad. Okay. Dear mom and dad. I'm writing home. Don't say that. That's insane. We're all just people. You can't say that either. And in an effort to police this. In a 1984 Orwellian novel. There was actually an eyes and ears program.

To rat on your fellow students who might say mom and dad. Or just say in a tough situation. You know what? We're all just people can't say that. This wasn't limited by the way to our academies. Um The secretary of the Air Force. Our current secretary of the Air Force in a memo from August of 2022 thought we had too many white officers.

Advocated for quotas. And if you crunch the numbers that meant that 5800 white officers who've worked really hard should be fired. In the United States of America. I don't know how we got here. And by the way, the Air Force isn't alone here. The Navy sort of touted a drag queen influencer. Um, this stuff is insane And people wonder why recruiting is dropped off. And let me just go through a few numbers, then I want to get your comments on

how we fix this, because it's gone completely off the rails. In 2022, the Army missed their recruiting goal of 60,000 soldiers by over 15,000. In 2023, the Navy missed their recruiting goals by over 7,000. In 2022, the Air Force couldn't meet their standards, their numbers, even though they lowered their standards. They've lowered their standards to meet numbers they still can't get to. Mr. Hexeth, we got to fix this. I think what you've demonstrated today is that you have the talent and the ability and the desire to fix it. How are you going to fix it? Well, Senator, thank you for the question. First and foremost, up front, you have to tear out DEI and CRT initiatives root and branch out of institutions.

100%. And then you have to put in Army, Navy and Air Force secretaries and others, civilian positions at the helm who are committed to the same priorities that the President of the United States is, and if confirmed, the Secretary of Defense will be. Send a clear message that this is not a time for equity. Equity is a very different word than equality. Equality is the bedrock of our military. Men and women, duty positions in uniform, black, white, doesn't matter. We treat you equally based on who you are in the image of God as an individual.

And we all get the same bad haircuts. You're not an individual. You're part of a group. Equity prescribes some sort of an outcome. Based on differing attributes that we have that divide us. What skin color are you? What? What gender are you? And then infuse that into institutions which manifest in things like quotas, formal or informal, which does what tomorrow?

Sends it in the tubes, and it makes people feel like they're being judged by something other than how good they are at their job, which is poisonous inside institutions. So what does that mean? what tomorrow sends it in the tubes, and it makes people feel like they're being judged by something other than how good they are at their job, which is poisonous inside institutions. So on top of this recruiting crisis that wasn't enough for this administration. During the COVID hysteria and in their attempt to fire 100,000 people who work for bigger companies because they didn't get the COVID shot or to mask five year olds. They decided also to make this a

central plank in their policy at the Pentagon. 8000 well trained, so we got a recruiting crisis. 8000 well trained men and women were fired. We're fired. Will you commit today? Mr Hex, get Hexeth to recruit these folks back to give them back pay and give them an apology from the United States government for how they were disrespected. Senator, I will commit to this because the commander in chief has committed to this, that not only will they be reinstated, they will receive an apology apology back pay and rank that they

lost because they were forced out due to an experimental vaccine. Thank you. And I'm a limited time, but I just want to say for all the talk. Of experience and not coming from the same cocktail parties that permanent Washington is used to. You are a breath of fresh air. And again, if you weren't paying attention to what this election was all about, it was about the disruptors versus the establishment. And the American people have had enough of business as usual for the same people that we line up for

these same jobs who give us the same results. We need somebody who's gonna go in there there and fight for innovation fight for change. I think you're that person, and I appreciate your willingness to sit here and listen to some of these undignified attacks. It's ridiculous. Thank you, Captain Mark Kelly. You're right. Thank you, Mr Chairman. Congratulations on your chairmanship. Um, I want to make a request to the committee that we have a second round of questions. Pursuant to the bipartisan staff agreement that we reached late

last year. Um, this will be one Round of seven minute questions. Thank you. Thank you, Mr Chairman. I'll be happy to recognize my colleague, Mr. Read. I chairman, a member to ask for a second round and receive the second round. So We are, I think, violating the principles of the committee, and I just want to go on the record. And your your comment is noted. Thank you. Mr Heg said. Thank you for being here today. Thank you for your service to this country. Thank you, Senator. Few nominees come into this room with all the necessary experience to do this job to be secretary of defense. We get that.

It's a reflection on just how big of a job this is. What I want to understand is whether or not you bring any of the necessary experience that this job requires. And here's where I'm concerned. Senator Coleman in introducing you, and this is a quote, he said he has struggled and overcome great personal challenges, unquote. You walk in here saying that you've had personal and character issues in your past, including heavy drinking, which you wrote about. And you said, and this is a quote from you. That you said I sit before you as an open book. Yet you haven't actually said what personal challenges. It is that you've overcome when you've been asked about them. So

I'm going to give you an opportunity here to be as forthright as you say you want to be. So while leading concerned veterans of America, there were very specific cases cited by individuals about your conduct. I'm going to go through a few of them, and I just want you to tell me if these are true or false. Very simple. On Memorial Day 2014 at a CVA event in Virginia, you needed to be carried out of the event for being intoxicated. Senator Anonymous smears. Just true or false?

Very simple. Summer of 2014 in Cleveland, drunk in public with the C. V. A team. Anonymous smears. I'm just asking for true or false question. Sure. False answers. An event in North Carolina drunk in front of three young female staff members after you had instituted a no alcohol policy and then reversed it. True or false? Anonymous smears. December of 2014 at the CVA Christmas party at the Grand Hyatt at Washington, D. C. You were noticeably intoxicated and had to be carried up to your room. Is that true or false? Anonymous smears. Another time a CVA staffer stated that you passed out in the back of a party bus. Is that true or false? Anonymous smears. In 2014, while in Louisiana on official business for CVA, did you take your staff, including young female staff members, to a strip club? Absolutely not. Anonymous smears. So Is it?

Accurate. That the organization reached a financial settlement with a female staffer who claimed to be at a strip club with you. And there was a colleague who attempted to sexually assault her. Was there a financial settlement? Senator, I was not involved in that. I don't know the nature of how that played out. But you understand there was a financial settlement for a young female staffer who accused another member of the organization,

not you, of sexual assault in a strip club. We have multiple statements on the record referring to that. But you claim you were not there when that occurred? Absolutely not. Now, the behavior I cited, if true, do you think that this behavior of intoxication? Going into these type of establishments. Women on your staff being so uncomfortable that they have to file these sort of harassment claims. Do you think this?

Is appropriate behavior for a leader. Senator Wellman, Senator, the overwhelming majority of anyone who's worked for me, including the on the record statements that have been submitted to this with their name on it on the record, men and women who worked with me every day are the overwhelming preponderance of evidence that testify to my leadership and professionalism in leading Vets for Freedom and Concerned Veterans for America. My leadership has been completely impugned on these veterans organizations that did fantastic work. Mr. Hegseth, I'm not even going to go into the accusations. We managed our financial books with integrity across the board. How many people, everybody who runs the campaign. I have limited time.

I'm not going to get into the accusations that come from Fox News. I know you have some of your Fox News colleagues here. There are multiple instances of accusations against you about drinking on the job. All anonymous, all false, all refuted by my colleagues who I worked with for 10 years at 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. and everything in between. The challenge here for me, Mr. Hegseth, is when there is discussion about personal challenges, and you admittedly had issues with heavy drinking. It's hard to kind of square this, to square the circle here.

It's kind of a difficult thing to do. Let me ask you, I have about 90 seconds left here, If you had to answer these questions about sexual assault against you and your drinking and your personal conduct, would it have been different if this if you were under oath? Senator. All I'm pointing out is the false claims against me. Okay, take it. You do not want to answer that question. I walk it walked into into this hearing this morning concerned that you haven't demonstrated adequate leadership in your civilian roles.

And this is a dangerous world we're living in here. And America cannot afford a Secretary of Defense who is unprepared for that mission. I'm going to leave with concerns about your transparency. You say you've had personal issues in your past. Yet when asked about those very issues, you blame An anonymous smear campaign, even when many of these claims are not anonymous. Which is it? Have you overcome personal issues? Or are you the target of a smear campaign? It can't be both. It's clear to me to me that you're not being honest with us or the

American people because you know the truth would disqualify you from getting the job. And just as concerning as each of these specific disqualifying accusations are what concerns me just as much Is the idea of having a secretary of defense. Who is not transparent. Thank you, Mr Chairman. I yield back my two seconds. Thank you, Senator Kelly. I would at this point as unanimous consent to

Introduce into the record. Letters By Tina Kingston, Louisiana State Director of Concerned Veterans for America and Holly Talley, Louisiana local director of Concerned Veterans for America, attesting to the appropriateness of Mr. Hex's conduct with regard to female staffers. Without objection, that is added to the record. And Senator Banks, you are now recognized. Thank you, Mr Chairman. Welcome, Mr Hegseth. You have conducted yourself very well today.

In fact, so well that I believe it's incumbent upon this committee to confirm you ASAP to get you on the job to clean up the mess. That we have at the Pentagon ongoing at this moment. Because of the leadership there over the last four years has failed us. In President Biden's first year in office. The Department of Defense spent over 5 million man hours on quote unquote counter extremism. And diversity training what you and I might call woke training or

D E I. The administration has refused to provide us any more recent data than that first year, but we know that it's exponentially more man hours wasted on D E I over the last four years. And I wonder what do you make of that? What could those 5 million man hours in that first year of Secretary Austin and President Biden's administration? What could those five hour 5 million man hours have been used for? Senator. That's a lot of service members.

Sitting in a lot of briefs. Hearing about a lot of threats or Political perspectives that might be dangerous that comport, do not comport to threats that actually exist inside the force or ideas that introduce critical race theory or DEI or climate change initiatives that they and their commands have to conform to. And every time one of those happens, it gets pushed down the chain of command. That also includes new layers of leadership that have been created under this administration committed to enforcing those types of DEI and CRT initiatives. That takes away from a company commander or battalion commander or wing commander who's out there trying to maintain their force,

which is already constrained because of what the Biden administration has done to the defense budget and defense capabilities. So they're having to choose between the political prerogatives of the civilians who are demanding more DEI and CRT and gender quotas and the readiness of their forces. And I believe this Pentagon is prepared because of our commander in chief for a secretary of defense. Should I be confirmed that focuses laser focuses on these issues and they're ready to respond. They want to pack their rucksacks and go train because they understand we live in a dangerous world. I think that's an important point. A key point because months later. While the priority of the Biden Austin led Pentagon was on D E I and woke training. One of the biggest embarrassments in American history happened when we lost 13 of our heroes. In the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan. Secretary Austin testified before the House Armed Services Committee a couple of years ago and responding to a question from me said he had quote no regrets.

About what happened in Afghanistan. I wonder what do you make of that? Senator shameful. Um They still touted as the most successful airlift in American history. When what the rest of us all saw was true laid before our eyes. Utter failure. When what the rest of us all saw was true laid before our eyes. Utter failure.

A destruction of a military legacy there. Abandonment of our allies. Death of American troops. Detriment to our reputation. And then no answers and no accountability on the other side. And then what was unleashed because of what happened in Afghanistan? The October 7th attacks. An invasion into Ukraine. The world recognized weakness for what it was.

And who bore the brunt for the troops on the front lines at Abbey Gate, doing an impossible job whose external security was the Taliban. Because there was no actual plan for this under the Biden administration. And yet. Not a single person. The only person held accountable in those moments was a Marine Corps lieutenant colonel who had the courage to stand up and say someone should be held accountable for that. His name is Stu Scheller. No one else involved has ever taken accountability for it. When that microcosm becomes the reality of the perception

of the American military or America's commitment. To victory and success and positive outcomes. The world response to that President Trump is going to restore real deterrence by bringing a real warrior culture back, rebuilding our military and ending wars properly. And if we have to fight them winning them decisively. I served in Afghanistan. You served in Afghanistan, 75 75% of our nation's veterans disagree with how the withdrawal from Afghanistan was handled. The embarrassment of it. What that's done, I believe How do we bring pride back to wear in the uniform for the next generation to inspire them to's why we all have political perspectives. I said this before and I'll say it again. In uniform. None of that matters. You wear green. You wear blue. You bleed red. That's it. Who you vote for doesn't matter. But when the perception of that changes, then you don't want people deciding whether to serve based on a political party in power.

That's a dangerous thing for continuity inside your military. And it's fragile right now. President Trump, and if I'm confirmed with my leadership, we're going to restore the continuity of an apolitical military that acts decisively and only based on merit. They sound basic, but they're fundamental. You and I agree that wokeness is weakness. Mr Hegstead. Do you support racial quotas in recruitment or promotions in the United States military? Senator. I do not

Support any form of racial quota. Do you support affirmative action in our nation's military academies? Senator. I only support hiring and promoting and admitting the best and brightest whatever their background is. I think that's that's very important. Mr Heg said Lloyd Austin, the secretary later went a wall. He disappeared for days and never told the president didn't even inform the president's chief of staff that he was going into the hospital. Would that ever occur on your watch?

Uh, no, Senator. I know in any one of my jobs if I had decided to go a wall for even a day or two in uniform around that, um, that would have been a concern. I believe accountability matters. No one to this day has ever, as you've said, been held accountable for what happened in Afghanistan. It was embarrassing to this country. It's impacted this country greatly, and I applaud you and President Trump for being accountability back to our Pentagon with that. I yield back. Chair recognizes the distinguished ranking member for unanimous

consent request. Mr Chairman, I would like to submit an article discussing some of the issues of Readiness and D. I There has been a comment that 5.9 million man-hours have been used for DEI. General Meyer clarified that that is an estimate out of more than 2 million man-hours that the Department of Defense Invested during the time period. Where is this published, sir? This is published by Megan Myers, and I will get the okay. Then

Military dot com. I'm sorry without objection. It will be admitted to the record. And center slot can Welcome to the committee and your record Slotkin, welcome to the committee and your record. Thank you, Senator, and thank you for referencing the great Carl Levin as you introduced me. We miss him in Michigan.

For those who I haven't met in my one week that I've been sworn into the Senate, I'm a CIA officer recruited after 9-11. I did three tours armed in Iraq alongside the military and have worked for four different secretaries of defense, both Democrat and Republican, proudly, and watched them make decisions that literally determine the life and death of Americans in the dark of night. I'm also a Democrat representing a state that Trump won, right?

We both won on the same ballot. So I understand that President Trump has the right to nominate his people. We are going to have policies that we disagree with all of that to me comes very standard. What I think I'm most concerned with is that no president has the right. To use the uniform military in a way that violates the U. S Constitution and further taints the military as that a political institution that we all want. Right?

Um and our founders designed the system so that, um, you know, we had posse comitatus that we weren't going to use active duty military inside the United States and make American citizens potentially scared of their own military. We went through our own experience with that with the British. As the secretary of defense, you will be the one man standing in the breach. Should President Trump given a legal order, right? I'm not saying he will, but if he does, you are going to be the

guy that he calls to implement this order. Do you agree that there are some orders that can be given by the commander in chief that would violate the U.S. Constitution? Senator, thank you for your service. But I reject the premise that President Trump is going to be giving illegal order. No, I'm not saying he will. But if do you believe there is such a thing as an illegal order that Joe Biden or any other president, Donald Trump could give? Is there anything that a commander in chief could ask you to do with the uniform military

that would be in violation of the U. S Constitution. Send anybody of any party could give an order that is against the Constitution or against the law. Right? Okay, So and are you so are you saying that you would stand in the breach and push back if you were given an illegal order? I start by saying I reject the premise that President. I understand giving done your Jenny illegal orders at all. My my This is a an illegal order. I start by saying I reject the premise that President I understand you've done your Jenny illegal orders at all.

My Mike. This isn't a hypothetical. Okay, your predecessor in a Trump administration, Secretary Esper was asked and did use uniform military to clear on armed protesters. He was given the order to potentially shoot at them. Helos flew low in Washington, D. C. As crowd control. He later apologized publicly for those actions. Was he right or wrong to apologize? Senator I was there on the ground. I saw that I saw. I understand and I respect that I've been there. I understand the level of threat area of defense involved in that moment. I was right. So he was legality and the Constitution. Was he right or wrong to apologize? I'm not going to put words in the mouth of Secretary Esper. No, he said of himself. You don't have to. What are you scared of? Did he do the right thing by apologizing? I'm not scared of anything. Senator say yes or no. You can say no. The laws in in upholding the laws in the Constitution in any particular scenario. Okay, so Donald Trump asked for the active duty 82nd Airborne to be deployed during that same time. Secretary Esper has written that he convinced him against that decision. If Donald Trump asked you to use the 82nd Airborne in law enforcement roles in Washington, D.C., would you also convince him otherwise?

I'm not going to get ahead of conversations I would have with the president. However, there are laws and processes inside our constitution that would be foul. Follow President Trump said in November that he is willing to consider using the active duty military against the quote enemy within. Have you been personally involved in discussions of using the U. S military active duty inside the United States? Senator, I'm fine. I'm glad we finally got to the topic of border security equaling national security because it's been abdicated and ignored for the last four years. That wasn't my question. I'm just asking, have you been involved? You're about to be the secretary of defense, potentially.

Have you been involved in discussions about using the active duty military inside the United States? Senator, I am not yet the Secretary of Defense. If confirmed, I would be party to any number of conversations, which I would not reveal what I have discussed with the President of the United States or not. No, no, just have you been in conversations? Again, you're going to be in charge of three million people, the active duty that I know you care about, I believe you care about. So have you been in conversations about using the active duty in any way, whether it's setting up in detention camps, policing dangerous cities? Have you been involved in any of those conversations? Certainly, I have been involved

in conversations relating to doing things this administration has not, which is secure the southern border and not allow floods of illegals to enter our country through an invasion that threatens the American people. And there are ways in which the military is already playing a role in that, to include 5,000 National Guardsmen from Indiana and Texas who are at the border right now, allowing for border security. So there is plenty of precedent for military members enforcing our southern border. Our U.S. military is not trained in law enforcement roles. I think you know that,

right? We've seen how that mission is difficult for them in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, because that's not the training a uniformed military comes with. Do you support the use of active duty military in supporting detention camps? Senator, everything we will do would be lawful and under the Constitution. But I recognize that this administration has advocated its responsibility. President Trump is going to restore order at the border, prevent our enemies from invading. And yes, he has said, mass deportation will be a part of what happens. In the spirit of preserving the institution that I think we both care about legitimately, uniform code of military justice. I've heard a couple of different things. One, you said you will not change the uniform code of military justice not attempt to change it. You also said that JAG officers are potentially people who put their own interests in their own medals and promotions ahead of the troops. Senator Lindsey Graham was a JAG officer for most of his life. Is that what you believe about those who implement our justice system in the US military? Senator, I was speaking about particular JAG officers I've had to deal with in in my military. Are you going to get a member of the United States? Are you a secretary of defense going to get involved in the implementation of the U. S military code of justice?

Senator. Ultimately, it will be a big part of my job to evaluate decisions vis a vis uniform code of military justice. Have you seen the fairly is CQ Brown on your list in the warrior boards to be removed from his position? Senator, every single senior officer will be reviewed based on meritocracy, standards, lethality, and commitment to lawful orders they will be given. Thank you, Senator Slotkin. I now recognize Senator Shaheen for a unanimous consent request? Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have a request from former general who served 35 years. Dennis Lach, who most recently was commander of the 94th Regional Readiness Command at Fort

Devon's Mass, who was asked that his letter opposing Mr Hegseth's nomination be entered into the record. Is there objection without objection? It will be entered. Um, also I present a, um, a host of letters and op eds from former co workers at Vets for Freedom and Concerned Vets for America as well as Fox News Channel. Um, I also have letters and op eds from many Veterans and Iraqis and F Gannies, um, who were helped by Mr Hegseth.

Um, I asked unanimous consent to introduce these letters and op eds without objection. Is so ordered. Senator Sheehy. You've been very patient. Thank you, Mr Chairman, entering a support letter in for Mr Hegseth submitted by nearly 90 former soldiers who served with Pete and combat. I would like to submit a statement from 86 of them who support his nomination, although they come from different units and ranks.

The signatories commend Mr. Hegseth for his selfless leadership, love of his soldiers, and commitment to our country. Two items. Sorry, one item. I ask unanimous consent to enter this. Without objection, it will be entered. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Pete, I'm actually going to ask you questions because I want to hear your answer. How many genders are there?

Tough one. Senator, there are two genders. I know that well. I'm a sheehy, so I'm on board. What is the diameter of the rifle round fired out of an M4A1 rifle? That's a 5.56. How many pushups can you do? I did five sets of 47 this morning.

What do you think our most important strategic base is in the Pacific? In the Pacific, Guam is pretty strategically significant. How many rounds of 5.56 can you fit into the magazine of an M4 rifle? Depends on the magazine, but standard issues 30. Senator And what size round is the M nine Beretta standard issue sidearm for the military fire? A nine millimeter. Senator What kind of batteries you put your night vision goggle

Duracell. So right there you representing qualifications. That show you understand what the warfighter deals with every single day in the battlefield. You understand what happens on the front line where our troops will be. And what happens unfortunately in this country is decisions made in rooms like this. Bad decisions. End up in dead 17 18 19 year old Americans and those those Americans

rarely come from families that sit in rooms like this. They come from lower middle income families. Sometimes the military's are on the way out. And they joined because maybe they want to go to college. Maybe they know the choice. Maybe they love this country before whatever reason they joined and they sat on the way out. And they joined because maybe they want to go to college. Maybe they know the choice. Maybe they love this country. But for whatever reason, they joined and they sat on the dotted line. And when people like us screw up. They don't come home.

That's the one thing that I care about is you remember when I shut the door when you came with their entourage, Senator Coleman, known for a long time. And you and I sat together asked you one question with that question was. Are you gonna have the backs asked you one question with that question was Are you gonna have the backs of the warfighters? Exactly. What is going to be your number one priority? I don't care.

Frankly, with all these letters and articles say I've been part of a smear campaign to I get it. I care that you're going to have one thing in mind when you sit in that chair on that five sided building, and you told me what that was. So with that you have my support. I'm sorry you have to go through a process like this, but it is one of the most important jobs in the world. We've got to make sure you're ready for it. I think

it for your answers. I got one final question. That's very important to me. This is more of a of a technical question, but I think it's To fix the army in this country. Is a one or two year problem. We can make bullets. We can make rifles. Fix the airports might be a five year problem. Fix our Navy is a decades long pursuit. How are you going to fix our national? You don't have all the power. We're not. We're not China. Unfortunately, can't snap your fingers. But how are you going to lead an initiative when the D O D to reinvigorate our national shipbuilding industry so we were able to compete with China

because freedom of navigation is critical to our economy in the global economy is going to be a very important task for you to complete. It's a critical question, Senator, and that's why I'm grateful that President Trump has said definitively. To me and publicly that shipbuilding will be one of his absolute top priorities of this administration. So a lot of it does go into pulling things up into the OSD's office, Secretary of Defense's office, to shine a spotlight on it, to make sure the bureaucracy doesn't strangle important initiatives that need to happen. We need to reinvigorate our defense industrial base in this country to include our shipbuilding capacity.

Some of it is on the east, some of it's on the west, some of it's on the Great Lakes. The workforce problems that our shipyards are facing are significant, and there's been a big investment from this committee, I know, in a lot of those places because of the shortfalls, manpower issues, everything else. We also see adversaries that have been able to innovate themselves in ways that their shipbuilding capacity is, I won't reveal it at this hearing, multitudes and multitudes beyond our capabilities. So it needs to be a rapid investment, a rapid fielding, and then we need to incentivize outside entities to fill the gap. We talk a lot about UAVs.

UAVs are very important, but there's also a future of UUVs, unmanned underwater vehicles, that will be a part of amplifying the impact of our Navy. Because this administration has allowed our number of ships to drop below 300. It sets a projection of 340 or 350, but doesn't create the capacity to actually address it. And so if we're going to defend our interests, our allies, and put America first, we're going to have to be able to project power. That means shipbuilding. It means historic investments in our defense industrial base there and then also driving innovation and cost savings in ways that only business leaders inside the Pentagon can do. When I dad, I don't think any board in the world would have hired Steve Jobs or Elon Musk. Or Mark Zuckerberg when when they found their companies either. So this country is founded by young people who had a great vision. Thank you for willing when being willing to serve your country again.

And thanks for coming here today. I yield back German. Thank you, Senator Sheehy. You yield back. The balance of your time. Mr. Ranking Member, can we agree that you and I will notify members of a specific time until which the record will remain open for submission of questions for the record? Yes, Mr. Chairman. That will be a day or two. This concludes today's hearing. I want to thank the witnesses and their families, and this hearing is adjourned.

Thank you. All right, ladies and gentlemen, five hours of live. And we were there posting and ripping right along with you. The comment section was freaking fire. And the Democrat geriatric, sociopathic, nasty witches and orcs and goblins proved themselves to be utterly incompetent, were destroyed multiple times, got the entire room that was filled with combat veterans and warriors and true warfighters to cheer for Pete Hegseth on multiple occasions. Pete Hegseth now walking over to shake the hands of the senators. There's Chairman Wicker. Everybody was like, what is wrong with this guy? He's from Mississippi.

A little slow there, definitely. Slow as molasses, they would say, in the South. I think Hegseth will be your next Secretary of Defense. I think he did an incredible job. What do you think, chat? What do you think, chat? I think he absolutely crushed it. Shows Donald Trump's insight and purveyance,

certitude and capacity to stand with people through absolute slander. Some of the most wicked and vile questions coming from Tim Kaine. Oh man. Tim Kane, a person who linked arms with Hillary Clinton, the bloody hands of Hillary Clinton, who is someone who had a serial philanderer that preyed on his interns in the White House and throughout his entire tenure in government, Hillary Clinton covers it up and then attacks the victims. This happened multiple times. Here's Tim Kaine with Bill Clinton. There you go. Okay.

So this guy, Tim Kaine, suddenly like really concerned about the fidelity of marriages. Suddenly really concerned about some of the sick habits people might have allegedly what a nasty lunatic what a sicko man age repulsed me that was the worst question can we go back to pete pete just meant um some of our uh some of our friends are in the audience here got some uh got some really cool friends we going to have some senators who will be joining us. Sean Parnell right there. You can see the

beard. You know, you all know Sean Parnell. It's totally, totally a dude as his wife right there in the blue, if I'm not mistaken. There you go. Okay. Hope it's his wife. He just kissed her. Just checking. Ladies and gentlemen, it's true. Uh. We're going to have Annapolina Luna joining the stream. We're going to have Senator Mark Wayne Mullen joining the stream. We're going to have various warfighters who are there defending Pete Hegseth, who's taken quite a run here. Let's just stay on him, right? Let's go in here and meeting the room, which is, according to all available reports,

90 plus percent warfight fighters, combat veterans, packing and stacking the room to support Pete. Now, there were a couple of protesters who were invited. Here's the deal. These protesters were invited by Democrats to sit in these seats. So somebody on the committee, he was a Democrat. We'd really love to find out who anna polina luna apparently knows who says that these democrat protesters were invited there to disrupt the hearing which is of course against the rules so they got carried out some of them

physically carried out limb over limb ladies and gentlemen this is going to be a lot of fun to watch this vote. Pete Hegseth won confirmation as Secretary of Defense in a magnificent performance that had the most atrocious personal attacks that I have seen since Kavanaugh. Some of the sickest stuff going after his children, going after his wives and then Senator Mark Wayne Mullen who's going to be on the feed he's going to be on the stream with us Senator Mark Wayne Mullen comes over the top it's like you dumb bastards you people show up drunk day and night you hypocrites and frauds you're all cheating on your spouses. How many of you guys had to sign some type of agreement with your former wives or your former staffers?

What is the number that Congress has paid out in sexual assault and sexual harassment settlements? Hey Alex, there's like a number out there. This is like an article is written. It's like hundreds of thousands, millions of dollars. These monsters. And they're going to sit there and come after Pete Hegseth for unfounded allegations and claims.

And Pete Hegseth doing a brilliant job saying, yo, let me explain to you something. Something, maybe I should just start my show off. So it's too many people with their skulls full of cement around, around these parts and in this movement and everywhere on the internet. Uh, let me explain what Christianity looks like. Uh, you are not perfect. You are a sinner. You are saved by grace alone. And God demands that you have grace for others. In fact, love your enemy, treat your neighbor as yourself.

And so Pete Hegseth straight up saying, you know what? I see what you got on there, Klein. That's a good one there, buddy. That's toasting. We're cooking. So Pete Hegseth says, yeah, I've made mistakes. What's the job here? To be perfect?

What do you mean? I'm supposed to be like some type of sinless person? All right, fine. Well, let's get Christ in this nominee. If Christ is not available, he's the only sinless person to ever live, then I guess we're going to have to settle on second best, which is a human being

who's made mistakes. And he admits that he's made mistakes, as have I, as have every one of those senators, sneering and sniveling. Elizabeth Warren was grotesque as well. She got bodied. She got completely destroyed. Elizabeth Warren did.

And here we go. Congress has paid $17 million in sexual misconduct and discrimination settlements. Wow. Would you look at that? Shucks. Incredible. Ladies and gentlemen, what a, uh, what a, what a, uh, very interesting. It was very strange. Would you look at that? 17 million in sexual misconduct, discrimination settlements. Well, joining us live right now, uh, is Senator Mark Wayne Mullen, who we were just talking about, did a great job questioning the Democrat side of the dais and arguably the most viral moment

from this entire hearing. Y'all are drunk womanizers and you're going to sit here and judge Pete Hegseth. Here we go, ladies and gentlemen, MMA fighter with a perfect record, Senator Mark Wayne Mullen of Oklahoma. What up, Senator? You came out swinging, brother. Hey, brother. How you doing? I'm sorry. I'm in a vehicle bouncing around. We just literally just left it. I'm running to another meeting. Yo. Yo. Okay. So you lit the internet on fire. Many are saying that you lit the internet on fire. Many are saying that

you had the best commentary today. What is it that made you, did you just, did you plan that? Or did you, did you just finally snap and say, I can't stand it with these frauds? No. When, when the gentleman from Massachusetts or from Virginia, Senator Cain, when he was questioning, it was so ridiculous because he was showing so much passion and so much, you know, content towards someone's behavior. And you're sitting there going, I know you, you do know that. And I know your colleagues, I know who you serve with. And you're going to sit there and you're going to belittle Pete for his past, which all of us have a past. None of us have been perfect. And then you're going to start telling him that he's not fit to serve.

Are you kidding me? If that's the standard half the Senate isn't, isn't fit to serve. So Tim Kaine is the same guy, if I recall, and my memory might be a little rusty here, but I can remember to the year 2016, feels like ancient history, where he was siding and running with Hillary Clinton, whose husband is a serial predator. That's confirmed. These aren't just baseless allegations. We know this. He was impeached for it and for philandering with women who were not his wife wife so it's pretty rich coming from tim yeah it's got that's kind of a problem isn't it but we how quickly we forget uh when it's all about getting a a new drill or getting a headlight by showing disdain for something that you condoned in the past i I've never heard him call out his senators for showing up for a late night vote, intoxicated. I've never heard him go to the floor and talk in such disdain about one of his colleagues getting a divorce because he was running around on his wife up here. I've never heard that before. The hypocrisy is so real when I've never heard him go to the floor

and call out any of his colleagues for showing up to the floor intoxicated or any of his colleagues for getting a divorce, for running around on their wives while they're up here. And I'm not saying he should. I'm just saying, if you're going to do that, then be consistent with your behavior and disdain for it equally, not just when it fits your narrative. Yeah. Don't run for president with it. You know, don't, don't, don't, don't obviously try and put Bill Clinton back in the white house. I mean, I guess is what I'm, that's right. You're too much of a gentleman to say it, but I'll say it. It's like, uh, obviously the guy who's been on Jeffrey Epstein's planes 27 times and tried to put that man back in the white house. Yeah. Right. Yeah. And it's just, it's just frustrating. So no, it wasn't planned. In fact,

what I was planning on doing just kind of gave him some softball questions because I've got to spend a lot of time with Pete and got to know his wife, Jennifer, over the last few weeks. And she's just a salty earth individual. I mean, I'm talking about she is just such a good lady. And Pete is someone that doesn't hide from his mistakes. He openly admits it, and yet he's still willing to put everything on the line. I have nothing but absolute respect for that. And so to hear what they were trying to belittle him and accuse him of, it just made my blood boil. Yeah, I think he did a great job, though. Talk about, clearly the man knows pressure under fire. Clearly the man knows what it's like to be under fire. You can see it today.

Yes, he 100% could. And I've said that before. I've said he was going to do fine because he's been shot at. He's heard the bullets crack over the top of his head. I'm not concerned about his composure when things get tough. He will be just fine. And it showed it today. I mean, that was a marathon of a hearing. He never lost composure. He never showed disdain. His body language didn't show disgust. He just sat there, took the oncoming fires that took place, and then fired it right back at him. Yes. He talked with you about DEI, about some of the wokeness in the military. Some of the attacks, of course, were vile. What did you get out of his testimony that was extremely positive from Pete?

Well, I think one thing he did is he set the tone right. Listen, I'm not against females or males. I'm for anybody that's willing to meet the standard for that job. If it's in the Army, the MOS, if it's 11 Bravo or whatever it is, you're welcome to do the job, but you're going to have the same standard. Let's set the standard. We're not going to lower the standard for DEI purposes because we've got to meet certain ratios for equality. We're going to set the standard for the same. And I think he hit that really heavy.

And I think that's a positive. And he also made the point real quick that we're going to go back to protecting the warfighter. The warfighter is important. You have 44 generals right now. And when we won World War II, we had 12, when we had four-star generals. It's amazing to me with what they're able to do right now and how we're able to even function with the amount of bureaucracy we have. And he pointed that out. And I'm just, I was thrilled to see him say that, that we got to bring it back to the simple person that wins the war, and that's the warfighter.

Yeah, I think that the Republican side of the dais did a great job in coordinating questioning in order to get at the very root of the heart of it, which is lethality in our military. And you saw multiple times that the people in the room, perhaps you can confirm this, Senator, who are warfighters. 90% of the room were warfighters and combat veterans who showed up to support Pete. Man, the room just busted up for Pete. He got a standing ovation. He's currently getting a standing ovation. He hasn't even left the room yet. And then when he notified

Elizabeth Warren that he's not a general, that one sent everyone. That was awesome. I thought that was awesome. When he said that, well, I'm not a general. But even with that, when she brought up that, she forgot the person that she voted for who's currently the secretary of defense. Because she was talking about when she was referring to the general, she was talking about where you commit to right now to not going into basically working for an industrial complex within and and she forgot that the very person she voted for um that she voted for was uh secretary austin

to be the current secretary of defense and he left raytheon to come do it it's just once again it's just pointing out how ridiculous they are, the standard they're trying to hold Pete to, which they never held themselves to or this current administration to. Just quickly, Senator, he's going to get in. He's going to pass. Yeah, he'll get in. I think he'll probably get 51 or 52 votes. He may lose one or two senators, but I think he'll be fine. I think he will get him through at 51. And I hope hopefully we'll be voting on him on the floor on January 20th,

right after President Trump is sworn into office. Spectacular. Courage under fire. I think Republicans did an incredible job today. I think the spectacular job. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks for having me on your show, brother. All right. Are you in a Jeep? I am. Bronco? Okay. No, it's a Jeep. It's actually my Jeep. It's my Jeep and it's got a 392 motor in it. So if you can hear it, it's not just your normal Jeep. Maybe I overcompensate. I don't know. We got some X Games motocross people here. They were wondering if you were off-roading, if you were at the mud pits right now just wondering no no it's just got a big motor in it okay all right we'll say well i got a producer who wins they said it was a jeep all right thank you senator god thank you all right ladies and gentlemen if you are inside of a Jeep, if you are driving through what I guess

must be a war zone in Washington, D.C., certainly was when I was living there, you should be using your Patriot mobile device. That's probably what the senator was using as he was joining our show there like this. We appreciate him. We love Senator Mark Wayne Mullen. Ladies and gentlemen, by the way, don't miss out. We have Annapolina Luna, who was in the room there joining the program, ladies and gentlemen, here. And it's going to be exciting. We have also multiple warfighters who will be joining the show to defend Pete. Ladies and gentlemen, Patriot Mobile, of course,

is the only Christian conservative wireless provider who can lock you in and set you up no matter where you're going, bumpy Jeep, Congress, or otherwise. Right now, go to PatriotMobile.com slash Benny and call 972-PATRIOT. Get a free month of service. The promo code Benny. They're available on all three networks. Nationwide coverage, exceptional experiences with customer service. I've had them. I love Patriot Mobile. I know them personally. They're an awesome company.

Switch to Patriot Mobile today and defend freedom with every single call and text that you make. Patriotmobile.com slash Benny. Patriotmobile.com slash Benny972. Patriot. All right, ladies and gentlemen, we are rocking and rolling.

Yeah, we got multiple people, multiple producers saying that, is he off-roading? Is he in a Jeep? What do we got here? Ladies and gentlemen, we locked in and we are ready to roll. We have something that I have, that I just, I got to play for you quickly here, which is why does he want this job? I thought this was great from a friend of ours, Rick Scott, a senator from Florida. Why does Pete Hegseth want the job?

Such a profound answer. There's so much going on that, you know, it's hard to – we have like 50 clips that we want to play. We can't play them all. Why do you want the job exactly, pal? Here we go. Why do you want to do this job? What drives you?

You have 30 seconds. Because I love my country, Senator, and I've dedicated my life to the warfighters. People see me as someone who hosts a morning show on television. But people that really know me know where my heart's at. It's with the guys in this audience who've had my back and I've had theirs. We've been in some of the darkest and most difficult places you can ever be in. You come back a different person and only by the grace of God am I here before you today. I'm doing this job for them, for all of them. Beautiful. I love my country and I love them. And he points back behind him to all of the warfighters, combat veterans, and service members there. Just very quickly here before we jump on over to an incredible veterans advocate who will be

joining our program to speak about some of the more vicious and slanderous attacks on Pete Hegseth today. Tiffany Smiley, who will be joining us in just a moment. She's worked with Pete Hegseth for quite a while, former triage nurse and somebody who's been working inside of the military ecosystem for hand and glove with Pete. This one is just too good. General Hegseth, what are you doing, General Hegseth? Well, I'm not a general. Boom, roasted. Here we go. You're quite sure that every general who serves should not go directly into the defense industry for 10 years. You're not willing to make that same pledge? I'm not a general, Senator.

You'll be the one. Let us just be clear, in charge of the generals. So you're saying sauce for the goose, but certainly not sauce for the gander. I would want to see what the policy of the president is. Oh, I'll bet you would. Thank you, Senator Warren. Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for your hard work and your committee's hard work. Mr. Chairman, this has gone well. I'd like to submit this letter, topic conduct at Vets for Freedom for Hexeth. I'd like to submit that for the record, please. Without objection.

General Hexeth, I mean Mr. Hexeth. Thanks for being here today and with your family. I know this is tough. That's what it's all about, though. You're a tough guy. Okay, ladies and gentlemen. Oh, man. One image really sums up what the Senate looked like today as they confirmed or are ready to confirm Pete Hegseth.

Here is the perfect shot of Kristen Gillibrand, who's clearly going to the beauty store and asking for the Gollum treatment. I don't understand exactly what happened to her. She looks rough. Yikes. Buzz. No, I mean, see, we did a side-by-side comparison. It looks kind of like Gollum, right? And Kristen Gillibrand was running for president, was like a darling. Man, wokeness destroys the mind, body, and soul. Wokeness destroys the mind body and soul wokeness destroys the mind body and soul we back go back to the tweet climb i want to do a shout out to jack we haven't talked a lot enough about jack mainly because we're scared of people named jack on twitter but yeah the old jack's off twitter this jack works for us and he's fantastic you should go follow jack unheard he's a

spectacular news and content creator. He's close to 100,000 followers, and we got to get him over the line, ladies and gentlemen. Let's give power to our movement and to people who speak truth and who defend freedom. Jack Unheard, ladies and gentlemen. Let's get him up to 100K, shall we? Ladies and gentlemen, joining us now is someone who has a breadth of experience working with Pete Hegseth, somebody who really sincerely cares about veterans' issues. Tiffany Smiley joins the show live now. Tiffany, thank you so much for being on the program. It's our first time to meet digitally. Perhaps you could educate me on the extent of your work with Pete and why you support his nomination for Secretary of Defense. Well, you know, the Pete we saw today is the Pete that I know and have worked with. And, you know, what I love is that he is tried and true. And

we need that in our country. We need tried and true leaders, not career politicians, not bureaucrats, you know, not the establishment. And that's clear now more than ever. You know, Pete gave me a voice when I was fighting for veterans at a time when, you know, it's not always flashy or cool, or it doesn't always drive ratings to talk about veterans, the VA and the issues that they face, but he did because he knew it was right. And that's the heart of the warrior that we saw today. You know, when Senator Rick Scott asked, Pete, you know, why, why do you want this job? Because clearly who wants to sit there in front of, you know, the whole world and face those questions. His response, it gave me goosebumps. He says, because I love my country. And that's exactly the Pete that I know,

who would give someone like me, a family like ours, a voice who had to fight two wars. You know, my husband was blinded in Iraq by a suicide car bomb in 2005. And then I had to fight when he's hanging on for life at Walter Reed. I had to fight for him when he didn't have a voice and fight the war here at home. Pete understands the bureaucracy, the red tape that we lay in front of our service members. But not only that, it's not just our service members, it's the whole family. And if we want recruitment to be better, if we want to show that our country, who we truly are, this world, who our country truly is, we have to understand that it's a holistic approach. And Pete gave me a voice. He didn't just have me on one time after my op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. He had me on multiple times. He was willing to talk. He gets it. And I can't wait for him to be confirmed. I think we have that op-ed right here. Let's pop it up on screen. If not, then it's another op-ed that you've written. Pete Hegseth is exactly what we need in the United States military. I've seen it firsthand.

You're somebody who, again, has worked with Pete and he had courage under fire today. This man has clearly been in combat and he got a withering barrage of IEDs and scud missiles and dirty bombs from the Democrat side of the dais. And a lot of those were based on his personal life, his women, his children, and like going deep and dark and a lot of allegations, a lot of unfounded allegations. What was your reaction watching that line of questioning? It seemed really consistent on the Democrat side. You'd think they'd be asking about military readiness, right? And like war fighting, but this is what they decided to ask about. You would think that they would be inquiring,

right, correct about the future of our military and recruitment. I mean, a lot of people aren't talking about this, but our recruitment is at alarming levels. I also want to know why are all the Democrat senators, they seem so angry and then so vindictive and they were screaming and it was not appealing at all. But Pete handled himself well. Low testosterone. Low testosterone will do it to you we we would trust me we're we're we're we're experts at being screamed at on the internet all day it's low testosterone it's criminally low in so many this is exactly what the american people are sick of that kind of of action you know that kind of questioning it's it's time to get back to open dialogue, to sincere, authentic, transparent. Pete has been so transparent and upfront with everything. And he is exactly the man to lead the Department of

Defense forward. You know what else is refreshing is he's not attached to any special interest group. And when I worked with him, he really got that because I was sort of working on the outside of the VA and the bureaucracy because of all the red tape that happens in government in DC. And Pete just really, you know, it's refreshing. It's a breath of fresh air. He's one of us. He's tried and true. He will cut through the red tape. He's not bought and sold by special interests. He doesn't have DC lobbyists coming after him. He's not going for a big contracting job at Raytheon or somewhere else. He has our backs, and that's the backs of the warfighters, and that's exactly what we need in this country. Maybe you can get onto a personal level since the Democrats decided to personally slander and attack this man. They don't know,

and they have all these unfounded allegations. It's the Kavanaugh book all over again. They'll roll it out every single time. You are a military wife. You're somebody who's worked and have to see firsthand. You're also a nurse, I believe, yes. And so it's like, what was your experience working with Pete? Was he ever dismissive or rude to you? Did he ever like treat you as lesser than? What, you know, hand in glove,

what was he like working with? Yeah, I feel like Pete reached out his hand in a moment where I needed a voice and lifted me up and gave me a voice. He's wonderful. Like, you know, he was amazing to work with. And then I met him him a couple of years later after even him having me on air several times. He knew exactly who I was. He knows the issues. He gets it. I have nothing but respect for him and his courage to stand up and continue to serve our country. It's not easy. I don't think a lot of people realize he's taking on massive sacrifices to do this. And I'm grateful. Our family is grateful. I'm grateful. And I know that he will get, you know, when he is confirmed, he will reach his hand down to all the war fighters and say, come on, let's go. It's going to be a beautiful

day for our country. Yes. So they made him out to be some type of knuckle dragging, drooling, lecherous lurch. And that has not been your experience. Not at all. Not even close. This can't come soon enough. And I encourage the Senate to move swiftly and quickly to get these nominations through specifically our national security nominations and get President Trump's agenda implemented as soon as possible. Wonderful. So as somebody who obviously experiences life in the military and inside of the military ecosystem, what is the first thing you want to see Pete do? Maybe one of the first things you want to see him do

when he gets the chair at the Pentagon? Yeah, well, I think, number one, he needs to end the wokeness. We know that it's infiltrated into our military. And he made that very clear. You know, there's one job for the Department of Defense, and that's our readiness and our lethality and protection of the American people. So I think that that's number one, let's have standards. And then second is recruitment. We know our numbers are extremely low, and that should trouble every single American, especially when you look at the dumpster fire that President Biden has created for President Trump to take on and the force and the lethality

that we need in our country and to show the world that you don't want to mess with us. We're the best, the brightest, the fastest, quickest. We have the biggest ships, the biggest guns, the best technology, and you don't want to mess with our country. And that's what Pete will restore and bring back that integrity and also accountability. When you look at the former Secretary of Defense, there was zero accountability. And if those Democrats who are questioning Pete today,

I'm assuming they all confirmed the former SecDef. They should take a look in the mirror because there was no accountability. And I know that that people restore that within the Department of Defense. He's a warrior. He's not afraid. He showed us today. He's not afraid to stand up and take accountability and be transparent. If these Democrat senators looked in the mirror, they'd see this and it'd be extremely frightening, actually. Whoa. Oh my gosh. Yikes. One ring to rule them all, right? My precious. Eat a fish. So final question for you, Tiffany. What's your message to the Democrat senators who lost their minds and had these like unhinged psychotic meltdowns over baseless, nameless, anonymous allegations against Pete Hegseth? What's your message to them since you are going to go on the record here? put politics aside. I know that's hard to do in Washington, D.C., especially as a Democrat senator, but to really step back and look at our country as a whole and look at the future, because my sons

are the ones that will be fighting these future wars. And I took on the VA. I took on, you know, the DOD for my husband. But not only that, I did it for my boys to know, you know, my husband lost his eyesight serving our country. And I did it to make sure that my boys have a country that's worth losing their eyesight for. And that's what's on the line here. So it's not about being Democrat or Republican. It's about being an American. And I hope that they can reflect and really think through what that means, what that means for the future for our children in the next 10, 20, 30 years in this country and put aside the partisan politics and just get the job done.

That's what this election, the mandate was sent down from the American people to them. So maybe they should rethink November 5th and what the people in this country really want. Yeah, that's right. The will of the people. Did not vote for Kristen Gillibrand to stand there in a- No. In a bar and sip her drink and yell, gay rights. I don't know if you've ever seen that TikTok. It's like the funny,

it's literally one of the funniest, saddest things ever. Oh man, she's unbelievably cringe. But I hope she has a great time with the One Ring to rule them all tonight as she caresses it. We are very thankful for you and your fight and for what you've done vocally for Pete Hegseth. Everybody, please follow Tiffany Smiley and smile along with her. Posts on X. Godspeed. Thank you, Benny. Brown, who happens to be joined by a bunch of combat veterans, I think an entire busload of them, who are on Capitol Hill right now to say, Pete is the man for the charm.

Ladies and gentlemen, former Navy SEAL Bill Brown joins us live now. Bill, what's going on, man? What's happening? Hey, Betty, how you doing? Bro, look at this. You're in a whole bus. You're in the bus. Hey, I got one thing to say.

Who you are, GXM! Woo! Hey, bring that sign back here. All right. Hey, we're out here. We've been out here since 8 in the morning. The Vietnam War Memorial, we started. We're holding the moral high ground.

We're letting everybody know what we're about. Hey, turn that sign around the other way. Thanks. There you go. Raise it up. Raise it up. There you go. Yeah.

Americans for Pete Hegseth. That that's it we're not messing around we're at a turning point right now our country's in serious trouble all right look this is what happened there was a major statement made with that election the only they didn't win any swing states and you know what if they had voter ids they wouldn't want any states this is what look there was a statement the american people made president trump has a right to pick his cabinet this is all bs any any republican center that doesn't get on board has got to get primated and get the hell out of there our country's in trouble our military and and my... Hey, Benny, I'm a SEAL. I'm an Iraq veteran. I got SEALs behind me. I got Scott Grady. He's a famous fighter pilot. Go, Pete! What's going on? of military gear to our enemy, there's a problem. Look, when you let a spy balloon go over sensitive military installations,

there is a problem. You know, your last guess was so right. There was no accountability. You can't have discipline if you don't have accountability. You can't win wars if you don't have discipline. Look, Pete's got to get in there. All those generals that bend a knee to the woke ideology, they got to get the hell out of there.

They put us all in danger. You open up that border, all the sophisticated portable weapons systems out there, you talk about mass horror in every major city. Like, look, the CIA, NSA, FBI, none of them can say I'm lying. That was a huge national security threat not to close that border. They were asleep at the wheel. They got to go. All this other stuff, you know what's funny?

We called it Operation Full Court Press. We got a bunch of SEALs and veterans. We packed them in that confirmation hearing room. And then we marched all around Washington, D.C. We marched all across the city. My legs are tired. And I've ran a couple marathons. We were out here all day.

And you know what's funny? We held a moral high ground. Those guys in the Senate hearing, we called them pinkies. They're in the back being disruptive. That's not how you act. This is how we act. We're out here sending the right message. Our country, we're not going to get too many opportunities.

We got to change things for the best. We got to get on track. We got to support Pete. And you know one of the things I love about Pete? He didn't flinch, just like Trump. He didn't flinch. We're not flinching. Yes, we love that.

We're going to put up some B-roll of you guys marching through the World War II memorial right now. Military veterans support Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense. Can you explain that sign to me, Bill? Because the entire hearing room was packed with combat veterans. I've never seen that before on Capitol Hill. Why does Pete resonate so well with the warfighter? Because, number one, he went to war for a country, Iraq and Afghanistan. He knows what's funny. Some of the things he's taken heat for, he said out of love. Look, here's the truth. We believe in equality. We actually believe that we love our female veterans. God bless them, right? But the

truth is there are distinctions between men and women. There are certain positions out there, like in the premier action units, but guess what? Not many women have what it takes just a physical body. I'm a big guy. Look at my buddy Bigby behind me. He's a big guy. If I get shot, most women ain't going to be able to drag me out of there. They're just not. That's the truth. Look, what the woke military did is they lowered the standards to get the results they wanted for PR. Well, PR is going to get us killed. PR is going to get those females killed. It's going to get those men killed.

We've got to refocus on the one thing about protecting us when we need it. Pete had the courage to step up and say, hey, something's wrong. He had the courage to say, something's wrong in the Pentagon. Guess what? If this doesn't get fixed now, look what's happening now with Chinese later generation fighters.

We're not having the ability to keep up. China just hacked into our U.S. Treasury Department. They hacked into our telecom communications. Look, there's two things we need to win in war. One is you need the tactical advantage. And two, guess what you need? You need discipline. We're falling behind in the tactical advantage.

And we sure as heck not going to have discipline when you don't have accountability. Well, Pete's going to change that. What have we learned from this election? They used lawfare. discipline when you don't Pete's going to change th we learned from this elec They use welfare, don't d to retain power and that' in that confirmation room like a bunch of babies sc

interrupting things. We'r We've been to war. If you have a hundred SEALs and veterans coming to Washington, D.C., marching all around this city, busloads of us getting up at 3.30 in the morning so we can pack it by 4 a.m., maybe the senators should listen. Yes. It's freezing cold in Washington, D.C. What you guys have done has been truly noble. You were up before the sun even rose, and you've been marching for, what, six, seven hours. Now, inside of the committee hearing rooms, you were escorted out if you made any noise, but you can make noise. What would you like to tell the Democrat senators that so viciously slandered and attacked Pete Hegseth today? I think you've got to really refocus what matters.

Listen, that open border, you saw what happened in New York City when they probably vet somebody if someone gets burned alive. That's nothing compared with a portable weapon system that can have mass harm. And did you think that a lot of our adversaries, some of those jihadist extremist organizations,

you think they haven't realized how open and vulnerable we are with a border? Look, that put us all at risk. And no one stood up. No one stood up. When your military doesn't stand up to that, they're not putting our interests first. And any senator, you don't have to be intellectual to realize that. Any senator should realize they didn't put America first. They didn't put us first. Look, if they don't change course, you saw what happened on 9-11 when we were asleep at the wheel.

You saw what happened to Israel recently on October 7th when they were asleep at the wheel. It will happen to us. The Pentagon better wake up. Yes. So final question wake up. Yes. So final question for you, Bill. And again, thank you for your service. Maybe you could speak as a service, as a serviceman, as a warfighter, as somebody who went and deployed for your country and gained the most elite status you can in the military as a Navy SEAL, served with honor. What do you want to see Pete Hegseth do first day in the chair as Secretary of Defense?

The first thing I want him to do is I want to reestablish the two things that we need to be successful in war. One is a tactical advantage. Warfare is not going to be like it used to be. They're talking about lowering the standards. Warfare is more technologically advanced than it's ever been it's going to continue to be that we need to recruit the right type of personnel so we can compete because in war there's no second place two you can't win wars if you don't have discipline you won't have discipline if you don't have accountability look there have been massive oversights that have put us all at risk. He needs to get accountability.

This has been really inspiring and I'm so proud to have had you and your crew there join our show. You were out with dozens, just want to get this right,zens? Hundreds of veterans? Thousands that marched for Pete today? You can see some of the pictures I sent you. Well over 200. We've been out here so many hours now, a lot of the guys and gals a little sore. So a couple bus rides home. Here's the thing.

Look, this is about our country. This is about our safety. The Pentagon's values were misplaced. You know, they were focused on things that really non-threats, like white conservative males. Look, guess what? Like, not to say there's not some, you know, outliers out there. But when you're focused on that instead of things like real threats, like you put us all at risk. When you're not focused on giving us a tactical advantage, when you're not focused on accountability,

you're going to put yourself in trouble. You're going to put us all in trouble. You saw what happened previously with Israel and in New York City. We don't want that anymore. You cannot have an open border like that. Yep, that's right. This is security for all Americans. Anybody you don't need a military background

obviously know what threat it is, and then you can see what's been happening with everything from the LA fires, the terrorist attacks in New Orleans. This country needs some reformation and a revival, and some people that are really serious about catching real terrorists and criminals and not innocent and peaceful protest protesters from January 6th.

Benny, let's talk about the fraud, waste, and abuse. Let's talk about seven failed audits. You want to talk about accountability? Just this year, they can't figure out where $824 million of military assets are. Like, what the hell is going on? Let's talk about why the hell are we giving millions of dollars to the Taliban, where it's an al-Qaeda, like, great adventure over there. Like, what the hell is going on?

Like, seriously, there's got to be investigation. Like, you can't fail seven audits and think it's okay. Like, what's going on? What's going on? We are so honored to have you on the program. Thank you for your work. It's so wonderful to see patriotic American flags waving in our nation's capital,

even in sub-zero temperatures. Tough guy like yourself, though, Bill. I'm sure you didn't even feel it. Everybody should follow Bill Brown here in what I think is warmer climate, doing some push-ups and going swimming. It is... Pete p head set had a pair of those on right this is like a navy seal thing right this is like you know what he helped

us raise millions of dollars and that's world for seals veterans gold stars and your family so you bet you bet your butt we're supporting pete well done well done it's an honor to have you on the show uh thank you to your entire crew uh Godspeed. Thank you for your service. Let's get Pete Hegseth in the chair. Hey, guys, ready? Hooyah, buddy! That's a first, and I freaking love it. Ladies and gentlemen, it gets the people going.

Thank you. Thank you. Godspeed. Godspeed. All right, ladies and gentlemen, that was freaking epic. Okay, we're going to check in on Anna Paulina Luna, who is, I guess, voting on the floor of the house right now. She wants to jump on the feed. But we are going to check in with her her ladies and gentlemen um in just a moment my producers are uh seeing if she can still join the program i'd love for her to talk about this which is something that made a lot of news the weight of a rucksack

the weight that a soldier must carry doesn't change whether you're a man or a woman a tank shell mortar round still weighs the same it doesn't matter it doesn't get somehow smaller or less heavy because of your gender so ladies and gentlemen uh pete hegseth revealing that there are different standards for women and men, even though that's insane, because the equipment weighs the same. And so you need specific individuals in specific positions. And this makes just perfect common sense. And that's something that we've been missing from our government for so long. Here we go. Trump indicated all that he plans to rescind or alter that guidance. You're correct to point out, Senator, that these are the decisions that the commander in chief will have the prerogative to make.

He has not indicated me to me that he has plans to change whether or not women would have access to these roles. However, I would point out ensuring that standards are equal and high is of importance to him and great importance to me. Because in those ground combat roles, what is true is that the weight of the ruck on your back doesn't change. The weight of the 155 round that you have to carry doesn't change. The weight of the 240 Bravo machine gun you might have to carry doesn't change. And so whether it's a man or a woman, they have to meet the same high standards. And Senator, in any place where those things have been eroded or in courses, criteria have been changed in order to meet quotas, racial quotas or gender quotas, that is putting a focus on something other than readiness, standards, meritocracy and lethality. So that's the kind of review I'm talking about, not whether women have access to ground combat.

So Brode did a great job. He did a great job. Well done. Sincerely, well done. Speaking of carrying out some dead weight, here's what happened with protesters when they were protesting, Pete Axe had to get carried out. Military. Addressing the recruiting crisis, the retention crisis, and readiness crisis in our ranks. Members of the security force will remove members.

Mr. Heseth, you may. I think there's, it's like, they were like physically hoisting and carrying. Very good. Hey man, sign that guy up. They can clearly rock a sack. Annapolina Luna, again, sign that guy up. They can clearly rock a sack. Annapolita Luna, again, noting that these were Democrat protesters that were planted there by the Democrat members of the Senate. They were given tickets to come and do exactly that.

But they didn't stop Pete Hickseth from making an excellent point about riflemen versus general, about generals who lose wars. Man, this is refreshing to hear people speak like this. Because everybody in this room knows, if you're a rifleman and you lose your rifle, they're throwing the book at you. But if you're a general who loses a war, you get a promotion. That's not going to happen in Donald Trump's Pentagon. There will be real standards for success. Everyone from the top, from

the most senior general to the most lowly private will ensure that they're treated fairly, men and women, inside that system. Alright, ladies and gentlemen. The more I, like, re-watching this, you just say, man, that dude was sharp. He was just sharp as a tack.

Pete Hegseth talking about the rot of defense contractors and cronyism inside of our Pentagon, which hasn't passed an audit in your lifetime or mine. Even though they spend trillions of dollars, you'd assume you'd want to know where that money's going, and we know exactly where it's going, to the Taliban, to arm them as we leave all of our gear there. Ladies and gentlemen, Pete Hegseth saying, we're going to root out the cancer inside of our military. Now, it is true and has been acknowledged

that I don't have a similar biography to defense secretaries of the last 30 years. But as President Trump also told me, we've repeatedly placed people atop the Pentagon with supposedly the right credentials, whether they are retired generals, academics, or defense contractor executives. And where has it gotten us? He believes, and I humbly agree, that it's time to give someone with dust on his boots the helm. A change agent. Someone with no vested interest in certain companies

or specific programs or approved narratives. My only special interest is the warfighter. Deterring wars and if called upon winning wars by ensuring our warriors never enter a fair fight. We let them win, and we bring them home. Like many of my generation, I've been there. I've led troops in combat. I've been on patrol for days. I've pulled the trigger downrange, heard bullets whiz by, flex-cuffed insurgents, called in close air support, led medevacs, dodged IEDs, pulled out dead bodies, and knelt before a battlefield cross. This is not academic for me. This is my life.

I led then, and I will lead now. And brother, that is strong. What a strong, you know, you sit through four straight hours of testimony and you don't actually absorb some of the stuff because it's just so much. And that is just such a solid case that he has actually done the work, the dirt on his boots, the dust on his boots, kneeling before a battlefield cross to say goodbye to a fallen service member. How many generals have actually done that? How many people who lead our Pentagon from defense contractors, fat and rich, have actually done that? You want to know why they love this man? This is why they love this man. P-Dex says that this is obviously a tactic to destroy me. The attacks on me are unfounded. They're baseless.

They're false. And they are clearly set up to try and bring the Kavanaugh treatment, something that we've seen a lot of these days, a desperate and floundering tactic. The demon screams of the Democrat side of the aisle, so embarrassing. We'll play a few of them for you. Pete Hegseth defending himself. So from story after story in the media, left-wing media, we saw anonymous source after anonymous source based on second or third-hand accounts. And time and time again, stories would come out and people would reach out to me and say, you know, I've spoken to this reporter about who you really are and I was willing to go on the record.

But they didn't print my quote. They didn't print any of my quotes. Or I've worked with you for 10 years. Or I was your accountant. Or I was your chief operating officer. Or I was your accountant, or I was your chief operating officer, or I was your board member, or I was with you on a hundred different tour stops for Concerned Veterans for America. No one called me.

No one asked about your conduct on the record or off the record. Instead, a small handful of anonymous sources were allowed to drive a smear campaign and agenda about me, because our left-wing media in America today, sadly, doesn't care about the truth. All they were out to do, Mr. Chairman, was to destroy me. And why do they want to destroy me? Because I'm a change agent and a threat to them because Donald Trump was willing to choose me, to empower me, to bring the Defense Department back to what it really should be, which is warfighting. So I'm willing to endure these attacks, but what I will do is stand up for the truth and for my reputation.

False attacks, anonymous attacks, repeated ad nauseum, printed as ad nauseum, as facts, we have provided to the committee, Mr. Chairman, and I know you're going to share, on-the-record statement after on-the-record statement from people who have served with me, worked with me at Fox News, Concerned Vets, Vets for Freedom, you name it, from the top of the chain to the bottom, who will say I treat them with respect, with kindness, with dignity. That's men, that's women, that's black, that's white, that's every background. I have prided myself as a leader

of respecting people, being professional. That is the balance of mind. I'm not a perfect person, as has been acknowledged. Saved by the grace of God, by Jesus and Jenny. I'm not a perfect person, but redemption is real. And God forged me in ways that I know I'm not a perfect person but redemption is real and God forged me in ways that I know I'm prepared for and I'm honored by the people

standing and sitting behind me and I look forward to leading this Pentagon on behalf of the war fighters thank you it's nice to sit back and to watch that with all of you and to see it without sort of the fire of it being alive and trying to catch up to the next best, the next thing, right? Get a chance to like let a, you know, breathe and see how utterly eloquent and how incredible his performance was.

A stellar performance today by Pete Hegseth. Pete Hegseth will and must be our next secretary of defense. Any Senator that votes against Pete Hegseth after this preponderous and absolutely marvelous holding down of what we all voted for, which is what it really is. Like we voted for nominees that speak like this, that have this priority, that have that fire in their gut and that wish to restore our military. That's part of what we all voted for. That's why thousands of veterans are marching through Washington, D.C. today in sub-zero temperatures. This is an extension of 77 million Americans, the will of the people. Senators that vote against the will of the people and the party that they have sworn their allegiance to must go. There must be a primary challenger,

and they must go the way of Liz Cheney. Liz Cheney lost by, I think, like 60 points in her Wyoming primary, and that awaits any Republican senator that dares vote against Pete Hegseth. Nay I say, vote against the will of the people. Any of Trump's picks. The freak out, of course, was legendary. Here we have a funny tweet that's going viral right now. Literally worse than active combat.

It doesn't have audio to it all right let's toss her up oh man ladies and gentlemen, it's tough to hear. Maisie Hirono. And hey, yeah, producers, I just got a message from Annapolina Luna. She's okay, great, okay, all right. She said she really wants to join this program. And so she says, yeah, let's do it.

Okay, so Annapolina Luna will be joining the program. I gotta get a response to this. to get a response to this meme. It is all like the screaming and the yelling. Annapolina Luna is someone who is a woman in the military. She's actively serving. That's what all of these individuals are screaming about. So maybe we can get a good response there to Maisie Hirono, who's definitely an IQ of 50, asking about the invasion of Greenland from a military perspective. Don't tempt us, right? Here we go. Would you use our military to take over Greenland or an ally of Denmark. Senator, one of the things that President Trump is so good at

is never strategically tipping his hand. And so I would never in this public forum give one way or another direct what orders the president would give me in any context. It sounds to me that you would contemplate carrying out such an order to basically invade Greenland and take over the Panama Canal. She's like a Pixar character. It's like created a laboratory to be just the dumbest stooge. Darn, darn, darn, look at this.

That's a great meme. Oh, the memes are rolling in, Gillibrand. Oh gosh, that's great. The cat meme. This one's good. These are pretty good. Alpha Chad, come on. It's your boy Pete.

Ladies and gentlemen, screaming Gillibrand. Oh, I'm so sorry for your ears. I'm so sorry. Hang with us. Stay with us. Annapolita Luna coming up in just a second. She's running back to her office to join the show. Screaming Gillibrand.

Raging. Clearly something horribly wrong with her, just a miserable person. It's amazing how when Christ talks about people who have light, the light shines from you, and no matter what, you are still joyous and uplifting and the eyes are the windows to the soul kind of thing, right? I always want to make sure that we do the show clear eyed and we laugh about everything that's happening in the world because why the hell not? You just got to let that light come from within you. You can see darkness when people live in darkness. You can see it when their souls have been overtaken by the darkness. You can see they sound actually just like this in the D.O.D, everything you've said in these public statements is politics.

I don't want women. I don't want moms. What's wrong with a mom, by the way? Once you have babies, you therefore are no longer able to be lethal. I mean, you're basically saying women, after they have children, can't ever serve in the military in a combat role. It's a silly thing to say. It's a silly thing to say. Beneath the position that you are aspiring to.

To denigrate LGBTQ service members is a mistake. If you are a sharpshooter, you're as lethal regardless of what your gender identity is, regardless of who you love. So please know this to be a true statement. So you say, you say it was a political thing. You say it undermined us social engineering i don't know why having someone having to publicly say um or not publicly say who they love is social engineering i think somebody should do that as like a meme where she's like on a therapy couch right and like

the therapist just has his face in his hand and she's just screaming, just going on and on and on. Take a breath, lady. Take a breath. We made this meme. We thought it was funny. My precious. What happened? These photos, the top photos are only five years apart.

What the hell? What are they drinking in DC? Yo, whoa, buzz your girlfriend. I don't do a good Gollum impression. I like, I don't do a good Gollum impression. Not even gonna try the Gollum voice. Not even gonna try it, ladies and gentlemen. One, one one one more ashley sent the funny clip of

the funny meme of her talking with a really high voice do we have that okay if not well then we will we will rock and roll senator mullen calling these people out as frauds senator mullen calling them out as fraudulent to their faces and saying, like what he just said on the program, y'all are clearly a bunch of people who can't look in the mirror. And maybe you won't look in the mirror because, well, you'd be scared of what you see. You just look very much like Gollum. This was, without question, the best moment of the hearing, in my humble opinion. Here we go. You know, there's a lot of talk going about, talking about qualifications and then about us hiring him if we are the board, but there's a

lot of senators here I wouldn't have on my board because there is no qualifications except your age and you got to be living in the state and you're a citizen of the United States to be a senator. Other than the fact we got to convince a lot of people to vote for us. And then when we start talking about qualifications, um, for if you're qualified for it, could the chairman tell me what the qualifications are for the secretary of defense? Mr. Chairman, could you tell me what the qualifications are for the Secretary of Defense? I'd be happy for you to do that. Let me read it for you. I was getting some advice from my second-in-command.

Yeah, but I'm just making a point because there's a lot about qualifications. I think it's so hypocritical of senators, especially on the other side of the aisle, to be talking about his qualifications, not be able to lead the secretary or be the secretary of defense. And yet your qualifications aren't any better. You guys aren't any more qualified to be the senator than I'm qualified to be the senator, except we're lucky enough to be here. But let me read you what the qualifications of the secretary of defense is, because I Googled it and I Googled it and went through a lot of different sites. And really, it's hard to see. But in general, the U.S. secretary of defense position is filled by a civilian. That's it. If you have served in the U.S. Army forces and have been in the service for you have to be retired for at least seven years, and Congress can weigh that. And then there's questions that the senator from Massachusetts brought up about serving on a board inside the military industry, and yet your own secretary that you all voted for, Secretary Austin, we had to vote on a waiver because he stepped off the board of Raytheon. And y'all are drunks and y'all cheat on your wives.

This editor continued to go on and on. It was awesome. He repeated himself also on this program, ladies and gentlemen, and I loved that line of questioning. How many of y'all showed up drunk for a vote, you frauds? Well done. Ladies and gentlemen, joining the program live right now, fresh off the House floor, and a couple of votes, somebody who was rocking it inside of the actual hearing room, somebody who

is herself a service member and serving in Congress is the great Florida Congresswoman, Anna Polina Luna, joining us live now. APL, what was it like in there? I can hear a little bit of an echo here with a shot. Yeah, we can hear an echo here, so we're going to have to mute something. Yeah, okay, there we go. We can fix it on our end. Don't worry about it, Congresswoman. So I will speak slowly.

What was it like in the hearing room? How do you think Pete Hegseth did today? You know, I was there, and the reason I wanted to go, Benny, is because not only am I a veteran, but I'm a member of Congress, and these crazy smear campaigns, mind you, this is unfortunately nothing new on the Hill or in Washington, D.C. If you are a conservative, if you are male, specifically if you are a white male, it seems that all the allegations that are constantly being thrown by the left and the radical left at that that's hijacked Democrats is really that you are either an adulterer, a womanizer,

an alcoholic, all of these quiet accusations that come forward from unnamed sources. And so I saw this happening to Pete. And then I would say one of the more crazy accusations was that he was somehow a white supremacist because he had the Jerusalem cross tattooed on him, which I would then respond, if Pete Hegseth is such a white nationalist, why is it that Jimmy Carter's funeral pamphlet had the same cross? Or why is it that jimmy carter's funeral pamphlet had the same cross or why is it that it's on the floor of churches and so i wanted to show my support for him and of course just as i had suspected as soon as we got in it hadn't even been five minutes into the opening where he was really asked to address some of those false accusations so i think that he actually did well

i think pete you know he mentioned that he was forged and that it really prepared him for this position and i would agree you know a lot of what these senators were looking for, specifically those that have been really campaigning and putting on their social media messaging against Hegseth because he's a Trump appointment for SecDef, you know, he was able to debunk and really not give them the sound bites that they were looking for. So very happy with his performance. But it's unfortunate, you know, I have a little boy and I would never want him to go through that just because of his political ideologies. Yeah. I loved him saying, I'm a Christian. I'm saved by faith. Everybody needs

redemption and forgiveness. I have a beautiful family. I have a beautiful wife. And then the other senators got what was coming to him with Mark Wayne Mullen saying, uh, yeah, y'all, y'all, y'all war, y'all coming after this guy for drinking too much and for cheating on his wife. Like, who are you? Have you ever looked in the mirror? What's your message to the Democrats, specifically the female Democrats that were so vicious

and so vile against Pete Hegseth in this hearing? You know, they kept bringing up the fact, and of course this was taken out of context, but they kept bringing up the fact that Pete was allegedly saying that women shouldn't serve in the military military they were implying it right and the fact is is that that could not be farther from the truth I've actually been talking with Pete throughout this process Pete knows I'm a combat not a combat veteran but he knows I'm a veteran and he also too you know that was a point of discussion and

part of the reason why I was vocally there to support him is because he realized they were going to try to attack him with that. But I want to kind of get into that topic of discussion. So first of all, the Senate actually had passed in the NDAA, or tried to send it back to the House, a measure that would actually, and this was pushed by Senate Democrats, that would actually cause women to have to register for the draft. And so it's interesting, they keep advocating that women should be put register for the draft. And so it's interesting, they keep advocating that women should be put on the front lines. And I would actually say as a member of the military, you know, there are certain roles that the military, that women serve in the military,

and they're great roles. But I would be very careful, and I think that this should be brought up with the Trump administration on putting women specifically into some of these positions that would not just hurt the women but also Results and I think jeopardizing the mission of the entire team So one thing that people don't discuss is there was a study done and I want to try to find that study for you for You betty so that you can see it but it addressed specifically that when women were in crisis and Men saw that that men would naturally respond to get that woman out of crisis. Now,

that's the right thing for men to do. I think that whole idea of men being defenders, I think that, and I would applaud that. I think that that's the natural instinct for most men. But when you have women that are in combat zones and then they're subjected to that, it can also result in other people getting killed. And so I don't think women should have to be forced to register for the draft. And I definitely think women serve an incredible role in the military, but I would not ever advocate for women being put directly into harm's way. And it's unfortunate that people like myself can say that, but if Pete Hegseth says it because of his packaging, then he's somehow anti-woman.

And so again, these same senators are advocating for men and women's sports that literally beat up women. But if Pete Hegseth stands up for women, he's somehow anti-woman, which makes no sense. So I'm glad that he really was able to refute that and correct that. But again, it's just unfortunately the game of the political landscape. Ladies and gentlemen, yes, okay. I just want to – I'm just getting a message right now. You know – okay, all right, good. For my producers.

Quickly here, Bill Clinton is somebody who we know is an absolute monster. We know that Bill Clinton is himself a predator and somebody who cheated on his wife time and time and time again. Yet Tim Kaine, who had the harshest critique of Pete Hegseth today, ran with Hillary Clinton for president to put Bill Clinton back in the White House. The guy who was on the Lolita Express 27 different times.

You've talked about it a little bit, the Epstein list on this program. Just your takeaway on sort of the egregious fraudulence of these. I think a lot of people saw Cain's questioning. Remember, a lot of people don't even know who Cain is. I think when you bring up the fact that he ran with Hillary Clinton, a lot of people don't know that. But when you see how nasty he was and that he brought up, I mean, he literally made false allegations against Hegseth, of which some of the senators, to their credit, said, you know, here's a list of people that have refuted that and or these are false claims.

But it just goes to show that they actually can't and they truly don't understand the problems that exist with the Department of Defense. You know, Pete, a lot of what he was highlighting, and I wish the media would cover more, is the nature and culture in the military that's contributed to the decline in enlistment, the decline in lethality, and really what the military should get back instead of pushing woke ideologies. This idea that somehow your taxpayer dollars should be forced to pay for transitioning members, which should be the exact opposite with the DOD. He was addressing how to fix the core problem and to make our country respected and really our military feared again on the world stage, which is essentially the whole idea of peace through strength. But they didn't want to discuss that. They wanted to go with very personal, nasty attacks. And so I would say that not only does it undermine Keynes' credibility as a senator, but I'm definitely glad that Hillary Clinton lost

because I couldn't imagine someone in that position of power as vice president. Him and J.D. Vance are two very, very different candidates for office. And now, peace. We're excited about that. Yeah. Yeah. It's amazing when given an opportunity to talk who turns out to actually be the creepy weirdo obsessed with somebody else's sex life. It's Tim Kaine. And yeah, Pete Hegseth coming off great in this hearing, with the exception of a couple of disruptions, which I think I saw you say that these protesters were invited in, they were allowed to stay, and they were invited by Democrats to sit there and disrupt the hearing. Were you near them? Did you see this? I was actually there at the very beginning for a couple hours, and then I came back towards the end

because we had to go vote. But you actually, I think in that clip that's going viral of the Code Pink people, which were the ones that were holding those signs, I was actually standing off. And so you can see me there. They were trying to talk to you. You can see the back of me, actually. I'm turned away in that photo. But what's interesting is, yeah, I'm right there. Those people actually were sitting in some of the Senate-designated guest seats.

And so it's interesting who gave them tickets. But then also, too, I had actually brought in a poster that my staffer had placed in the back that actually had Elizabeth Warren's college application that checked her as being Native American. And they would not allow me to bring that in. And yet these people were literally allowed to stand there, hold up the signs, keep it up. And so very interesting. They wouldn't let me hold my poster which my poster was way better but they allowed these crazy you know no christian jihad i mean my goodness these people were screaming you know we want peace in the middle east which who doesn't want peace but then they're also advocating against pete hegseth and then invited in by senators to hold signs and disrupt so the whole thing as you can see was political propaganda the media also didn't cover the fact that there was over 500 veterans unless it was was a conservative outlet, they didn't want to cover that. There was Navy SEALs, there was Green Berets, there was female veterans, and they're supporting Hegseth, but they didn't want to cover that. They wanted to cover the crazies.

I know we're up against a hard out, but you were going to hold up Elizabeth Warren's Native American tick of the box. I posted it and I sent it to my team. I said, please print this. Let's get it. And then, you know, the staff from the president's team was joking around about my sign being, they confiscated it, which is kind of funny, but they allowed the crazy code people.

So next time what I'm doing is I'm just going to fold it up, put it in my purse, and then I'll just stick it to the wall. In closing here, you noted how many combat veterans were there. You yourself, a veteran. Why do veterans love and support Pete so much? Take it away. Yeah, look, I'm not a combat veteran, but I did serve in times of combat. And what I will tell you is that whether or not you served in combat,

the true marker of a good leader is one that not only takes into account the impacts of their decision throughout every rank, whether it's officer or enlisted, but specifically with Pete Hegseth, he would be one of the few Secretary of Defense's that has actually served in combat and understands the true impact of his decision-making process and how really it does come down to life and death you know what was interesting is during his entire defense of himself and really that's what it was trying to get his perspective and I think what he envisioned for the U.S military out there amidst the smear campaign that some of these senators were launching is that he wants to get back to the strong culture that the military represents I served under both Obama and Trump when I was in the military, Benny. And what I can tell you is I don't remember a time of it being political. Now it seems like if you are in the military,

you're only given higher ranks if you are left leaning and pushing a very pro-Marxist ideology. And that cannot exist in a true free country and then also too in a military that's strong and so I really look forward to his confirmation we did hear that he does have the votes it's terrible that he had to go through the process but Pete's a great guy a family man seven kids and his beautiful wife was there supporting him so we're happy that he really did well under fire metaphorically and we look forward to his confirmation oh that's awesome I I know you have to go, but he has the votes. That's what you've been told. Mark Wayne Mullen told us that a couple of minutes ago.

I also heard Senator Scott saying that he has the votes as well. And so I just implore people to listen to his arguments. Don't look at the smears, because we've all been smeared, even you have, Benny. And I think that that's unfortunately the name of the game. So, part of the job.

Yeah, on a constant daily hour by hour basis and it's like dude if if nobody if nobody is attacking you then well you're not doing anything right i mean you gotta you gotta buckle up because this is this is war this is actually war and we are uh thankful that there are war fighters that support p you're one of them and there's we'd have a better congress i think if more people that served in our military actually served in congress you're one of those excellent people everybody needs to follow anna paulina luna right here uh and buy her maxim magazine something i've never said on this program yes yes god's be kind

crazy okay uh ladies and gentlemen uh we signal boosted a meme and i would never do a meme rug pull on you. So here we go, ladies and gentlemen. Just the meme that I was... Is this a play beside? We have... As a play beside? Okay. Here we go. This is what I was calling for.

Oh, my God, bro. Just... Just... Oh, my... Oh my god, bro. APL posted this? Okay, here's what APL posted. Defense Secretary Biden versus Trump. 43 Republican senators voted to confirm Secretary Lloyd Austin and his woke agenda. Lloyd Austin got 90 votes in the Senate. So, yeah, ladies and gentlemen, you're going to catch yourself a primary if you dare vote against President Trump.

All we need is 50 plus 1. We have a vice president for the tie-breaking vote, and hopefully the vote will be on January 20. Wouldn't that be great? To have it actually on the day that President Trump is inaugurated. Well, ladies and gentlemen, as you well know, we have some very, very interesting programming for you tomorrow. We're going to be having Chrissy Noem, Pam Bondi. That's probably the one that we're going to cover, Pam Bondi. Marco Rubio is going to be very interesting. John Ratcliffe, CIA director. That's going to be good too. I don't know. We're going to have to do a poll. Sean Duffy, Chris Wright, Russell Vaught, Office of Budget and Management. All of these

are going to be very, very good. I think Pam Bondi is going to be just absolutely banging, though. I think that's going to be good. So expect us live early tomorrow around 9 a.m. unless we have a new baby, which may, in fact, be the case in the Johnson family. We're going to have to go and check. So as I've told you many times, my wife is full term now. And so at any moment, we could get the phone call and we will check in quickly and see,

ladies and gentlemen, what's going on? You saw me pause there for a second. I thought I got the phone call. We didn't get the phone call yet, but we are in a holding pattern as ever. So, ladies and gentlemen, we just want to say thank you for watching this five, no, six-hour live. Holy moly. Just an incredible live and a verse of the day. Of course, can't stop, won't stop. From Galatians 6.9, let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Ooh, could you imagine what Pete Hegseth has gone through, these people going through

every bank statement, every text you've ever sent, your mom's emails, how they even got that, nobody even knows. Your mother's emails from 10 years ago are printed on the front page of the New York Times. Oh, these people are scum. Oh, they're such scum. Ladies and gentlemen, let us not become weary in doing good.

Pete Hegseth has a heart of gold. He wants to do good for the service members. At a proper time, we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Don't give up. Fight with us. March in our army, our brigade. You can join the brigade if you wish at BennyJohnson.com. Sign up for the brigade, ladies and gentlemen, and get exclusive access to our content early. We're going to be doing more Q&As. We're going to be

launching new products, and it's going to be an exciting year. Also, you can sign up for memberships on YouTube and on Rumble, wherever you wish to support us. If you're happy with those platforms, then all the more the merrier. We are thankful for you in any way that you consume and watch our content. We are 100% independent, unlike a bunch of other various entities out there who get directions and orders, right, to attack and go after independent creators. Ladies and gentlemen, we answer to no one. So we can kindly say we apologize for absolutely nothing. And we are so proud of the work that we do here on this program. And we're so thankful for you. And so may God bless you. March with us on to victory. Pete Hegseth in the chair. Let's go. It's your boy, Benny. See ya. When you found out that the FBI had located even more classified materials in Which four-letter word did you use? Oh, my goodness, Peter.

I can't say it anymore. Let's say one last dance, right? I don't know how I'm going to fill my dance card now. How will I fill that void without you? You told me. You told me. This is how a democracy works. We talk to each other. Because only by speaking can we create a free and a... The Benny Show Watch the truth cascade with the glorious heart. This man never fades.

You know it's prime time when Benny invades. From saving the nation to stories untold. The Benny Show's a storm, see the truth unfold. Stay in the loop, let freedom take hold. Salt in all the libs, soul never sold. It's the Benny Show, where the truth gon' be. Faith and freedom on your TV screen. Stand up strong, battle through the night. The Show's here, bringin' liberty to life

Liberty to life Bringin' liberty to life Liberty to life Bringin' liberty to life From the speeches to the debates, Benny's sharp like a blade Cuttin' through the lies, watch the truth cascade With a warrior's's heart this man never fades you know it's prime time when benny invades from saving the nation to stories untold the

benny shows the storm see the truth unfold stay in the loop let freedom take hold salt and all the libs soul never sold it's the benny show where the truth gonna be faith and freedom on your tv screen stand up strong battle through the night the benny show's here bringing liberty to life We'll be right back. Former MLB All-Star Sean Casey, a.k.a. The Mayor, keeps hitting it out of the park. Take my 30 years of experience. Take the wisdom and knowledge I've learned from the failures when I got sent down my rookie year. All the injuries I had to overcome. Your mind is the most important tool you have in life. Be relentless. Keep charging.

It matters how you talk to yourself, how you look at the world. That matters. We talk about that. I don't know. I'm fired up. Baseball's back, and it's going to be incredible. I love it. The Mayor's that. I don't know. I'm fired up. Baseball's back, and it's going to be incredible. I love it. The Mayor's Office with Sean Casey from Believe. Follow and listen on your favorite platform.