Yesterday, Long Island Democrat Tom Suozzi was elected co-chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus. In his announcement, he said “The election results signal a mandate for common-sense solutions to longstanding challenges like border security, immigration reform, and economic recovery. Achieving progress on these fronts demands bipartisan cooperation. The American people we serve are demanding this Congress work together, across party lines, to get things done. This Congress is so narrowly divided. The Republicans only have a two-seat majority to work with, and they will need Democratic support to get things done. We have to be able to work together and find compromise, and the Problem Solvers know how to do that. We cannot solve complex problems in an atmosphere of fear and anger. True solutions require people of goodwill, even people who may disagree, to do the hard work to find common ground for the common good. I am honored to rejoin the Problem Solvers as Co-Chair. My philosophy is simple: I'll never abandon my values, but I'll work with anyone who wants to genuinely solve problems and make life better for the American people.”
We’ll see. Since the Caucus includes only members of the House, and only senators confirm nominees, the Problem Solvers won’t have to tap dance around find any kind of bipartisan consensus Trump’s disastrous nominations of Tulsi Gabbard, Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, Russ Vought, RFK, Jr and, of course, Pete Hegseth. Covering Hegseth’s confirmation hearing yesterday, Aaron Blake reported that despite all the baggage, DC conventional wisdom is that Hegseth will be confirmed. You’d need every Democrat and 3 Republicans to vote against him. And no one thinks that’s going to happen— though it should.
Blake wrote that “Hegseth probably avoided the kind of obviously damaging moment that could torpedo his chances. But one of the ways he avoided such a moment was by repeatedly and relentlessly avoiding answering questions directly. This is a strategy many nominees employ when the subjects turn uncomfortable. But Hegseth’s past— including multiple extramarital affairs and allegations of sexual assault (someone still cares about those things?), alcohol abuse and financial mismanagement— means he faced many more uncomfortable questions than your average nominee.
Here’s a look at the questions he didn’t directly answer.
Claims about his alcohol abuse
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) recounted a series of allegations about Hegseth’s alleged alcohol abuse, and repeatedly asked him to say explicitly whether they were true or false.
The one claim Hegseth more explicitly denied was that he took young female staffers of Concerned Veterans for America, a group he ran, to a strip club in 2014. Hegseth said he had “absolutely not” done that.
But on other claims of alcohol abuse during his time at CVA reported by the New Yorker, Hegseth would only call them “anonymous smears”— despite repeatedly being pressed for a true-or-false response.
The ones he would only call “anonymous smears” and not “false”:
Whether he needed to be carried out of a CVA event in Virginia in 2014 because he was drunk
Whether he was drunk in public with his CVA team in Cleveland in 2014
Whether he was drunk in front of three young female staffers at an event in North Carolina after reversing the organization’s no-alcohol policy
Whether he had to be carried up to his room at a CVA Christmas party in 2014 in Washington, D.C.
Whether he passed out in the back of the party bus
Hegseth has recently said he “never had a drinking problem,” but in 2021 he described self-medicting with alcohol. He has said he would not drink if he’s confirmed.
Cheating on his wives
This is a matter of public record. Hegseth acknowledged “infidelity” in his first marriage in that divorce case. And during his second marriage, he both fathered a child with another woman and had an extramarital sexual encounter that he says was consensual but the woman claimed was assault.
Hegseth clearly denied the alleged assault. But he wouldn’t provide such firm answers on the infidelity.
When asked whether he cheated on the mother he had just fathered a child with in 2017, Hegseth responded: “I will allow your words to speak for themselves.” When asked at another point, he cited “false charges,” even though the question wasn’t about the alleged assault.
He was also asked to restate that the 2017 encounter was consensual— as he has previously— and he struggled to form a response:
Sen. Angus King (I-ME): You’ve admitted that you had sex at that hotel in October 2017. You said it was consensual. Isn’t that correct?
Hegseth: Anything ...
KING: You’ve admitted that it was consensual, and you were still married and you’d just had a child by another woman.
Hegseth: Again ...
King: How— how do you explain your judgment?
Hegseth: Completely false charges against me.
Again, the question wasn’t about whether it was assault. It was about whether an encounter happened and was consensual. But Hegseth repeatedly declined to even acknowledge that.
Whether he would refuse an order to shoot protesters
Former Trump defense secretary Mark Esper has said that Trump in 2020 floated the idea of shooting racial justice protesters in the legs. Esper compared it to what authoritarian leaders do.
Hegseth declined to say whether he would refuse such an order, but instead focused on how unruly the protesters were:
Sen. Mazier Hirono (D-HI): Would you carry out such an order from President Trump?
Hegseth: Senator, I was in the Washington, D.C., National Guard unit that was in Lafayette Square during those ...
Hirono: Would you carry out an order to shoot protesters in the legs ...
Hegseth: ... I saw 50 Secret Service agents...
Hirono: ... as directed to Secretary Esper?
Hegseth: ... by rioters trying to jump over the fence ...
Hirono: Again...
Hegseth: ... set a church on fire, and destroyed ...
Hirono: You know what? That sounds to me that you will comply with such an order, you will shoot protesters in the leg— in the leg.
Hirono paused briefly, and Hegseth didn’t dispute her characterization.
Whether he has been in discussions about using the military in the United States
Trump has floated using the military against what he calls the “enemy within” in the United States. Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) repeatedly asked whether Hegseth had had any discussions about such a thing.
Hegseth would not say. He initially said, “I am not yet the secretary of defense” and added that once in that role, he “would not reveal what I have discussed with the president of the United States or not.”
Slotkin made clear she was talking about any discussions to this point, and the question wasn’t specifically about Trump.
“Certainly, I have been involved in conversations related to doing things this administration has not, which is secure the southern border,” Hegseth said as Slotkin tried to get a direct answer, “and not allow floods of illegals into our country …”
Whether he would resign if he drinks on the job
Hirono also asked about whether Hegseth would resign if he violated his pledge to not drink as defense secretary.
Despite being pressed repeatedly, Hegseth demurred. He instead called his pledge a “commitment on behalf of the men and women” he would serve with, saying it would be “the most important deployment of my life.”
Addressing his alleged 2017 sexual assault to Trump’s transition team
The Washington Post has reported that Trump’s transition team was caught by surprise by the details of the 2017 sexual assault allegation.
But Hegseth talked around whether he had failed to disclose it and, if so, why:
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA): Why didn’t you inform the commander in chief or the transition team of this very relevant event?
Hegseth: 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 Trump has given me.
Whether sexual assault or spouse abuse would be disqualifying for a defense secretary
Kaine asked repeatedly whether it would be disqualifying if Hegseth had indeed sexually assaulted someone. Hegseth would only called it a “false claim” and a “hypothetical.”
Similarly, Kaine asked repeatedly whether spouse abuse would be disqualifying. Hegseth would say only, “Senator, absolutely not have I ever done that”— even though the question was about “someone” and not Hegseth specifically.
Pressed again, Hegseth said, “Senator, you’re talking about a hypothetical.”
Again, the question wasn’t about whether it was assault. It was about whether an encounter happened and was consensual. But Hegseth repeatedly declined to even acknowledge that.
Kaine responded: “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.”
As Mary Trump noted yesterday, Hegseth’s complete lack of qualifications for the job led her to feel certain that he [“a white supremacist and Christian nationalist”] did not have “a snowball’s chance in hell of being confirmed— even with this Republican majority in the Senate. Yesterday’s hearing proved me wrong. Through a combination of behind-the-scenes strong-arm tactics, hubris, cowardice, and the Republican Party’s imperative to put country over party, perhaps the worst possible person for the job is going to get the job… Like the other outrageously unqualified miscreants nominated for positions that will have an enormous impact over the lives of Americans— from Robert Kennedy at Health and Human Services to Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence— Hegseth is uniquely unfit. That’s the point. Donald and his transition team could have found other people to fill these roles who were less personally offensive, more qualified, but equally eager to betray their oaths to the Constitution in order to do Donald’s bidding, but they want to weaken our institutions and degrade people’s confidence in them. Putting the worse people in positions of power will more comprehensively achieve those goals.”
Nobody asked him if he would order the military to help secure the reich when, not if, trump decides it's time to be fuhrer.
Maybe the joint chiefs and officer corps should be polled to see who would refuse to execute illegal/immoral orders from this pos and der pumpkinfuhrer.
But why bother? Nobody voted to prevent any of it.