Pete Hegseth’s Evasions Highlighted His Subservience To Trump
Pete Hegseth refused to commit to pushing back on unlawful orders, refused to rule out using the military against Americans, and refused to deny future military involvement in detention camps.
Thank you for reading! In the face of unrelenting disinformation, clear truth-telling and independent media are a necessity. We have to spread the truth as forcefully as gaslighters spread their lies. If you value in-depth analysis through a pro-democracy lens, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to my newsletter. Paid subscribers empower this work and gain access to exclusive community features. Your subscription makes a difference.
Heading into this hearing, there was one line of questioning in particular that I hoped Democrats would pursue. Of course, Pete Hegseth’s past comments about women in the military, his sexual assault allegations, and his alleged mismanagement of the organizations he ran are incredibly important. But in my opinion, the most consequential line of inquiry is this:
Will Pete Hegseth refuse to execute unlawful orders from President Trump?
I sent a post out first thing this morning, calling for Democrats to broach this question and to specifically cite former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, who said on the record that Trump asked if he could shoot racial justice protestors in the Summer of 2020.
Given Donald Trump’s past attempts to abuse military power on U.S. soil and his second-term promise to use the military against the “enemy within,” this line of questioning is particularly important for someone vying to become Trump’s Secretary of Defense.
Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI) briefly asked Hegseth if he would follow unlawful orders from Trump but quickly moved on from the topic. It was newly elected Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) who pursued this best, resulting in one of the most incisive lines of questioning of the entire hearing.
I’m going to dive into the exchange in detail because I think the way Slotkin phrased her questions and the ways in which Hegseth deflected and dodged them is incredibly telling about what we can expect from him if he’s confirmed as Secretary of Defense.
Senator Slotkin, a former CIA officer, began her questioning with some context and a bit of history.
“What I think I’m most concerned with is that no president has the right to use the uniformed military in a way that violates the U.S. Constitution and further taints the military as that apolitical institution that we all want, right,” Slotkin said. “And our founders designed the system so that 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…”
Slotkin continued, “As the Secretary of Defense, you will be the one man standing in the breach should President Trump give an illegal order. 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?”
Hegseth answered with an immediate defense of Trump: “Senator, thank you for your service. But I reject the premise that President Trump is gonna be giving illegal orders…”
“No, I’m not saying he will,” Slotkin interjected. “But 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 uniformed military that would be in violation of the U.S. Constitution?”
Whether Hegseth believes an order can be illegal is especially relevant given the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling protecting Donald Trump from prosecution for “official acts.” But, of course, that immunity does not extend to his Cabinet.
“Senator, anybody of any party could give an order that is against the Constitution or against the law,” Hegseth replied.
“So are you saying that you would stand in the breach and push back if you were given an illegal order?” Slotkin asked.
“I start by saying I reject the premise that President Trump will be giving any illegal orders at all…” Hegseth began.
As Hegseth was still speaking, Slotkin interjected, “I understand, you’ve done your genuflecting to him… This isn’t a hypothetical, ok. Your predecessor in a Trump administration, Secretary Esper, was asked, and did, use uniformed military to clear unarmed protestors. He was given the order to potentially shoot at them… He later apologized publicly for those actions. Was he right or wrong to apologize?’
Pete Hegseth then jumped into how he understood the level of threat involved in that moment, essentially trying to excuse the actions.
“What are you scared of?” Slotkin asked. “Did he do the right thing by apologizing?”
“I’m not scared of anything, Senator,” Hegseth replied.
“Then say yes or no,” Slotkin persisted.
Hegseth replied, “I’m interested in upholding the laws and the Constitution in any particular scenario.”
Slotkin didn’t let up and got even more specific: “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 Airbone in law enforcement roles in Washington, D.C., would you also convince him otherwise?”
“I’m not gonna get ahead of conversations that I’d have with the President. However, there are laws and processes in our Constitution that would be followed,” Hegseth vaguely answered.
“President Trump said in November that he is willing to consider using the active duty military against the ‘enemy within.’ Have you been personally involved in discussions of using the U.S. military, active duty, inside the United States?” Slotkin asked.
“Senator, I’m glad we finally got to the topic of border security equalling national security because it’s been abdicated and ignored for the last four years,” Hegseth deflected.
“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?” Slotkin asked again.
Hegseth replied that he is not yet the Secretary of Defense and that if confirmed, he would be party to any number of conversations and that he would not reveal what he’s discussed with the President. As Slotkin pressed him, he said he’s been involved in conversations regarding the border.
Slotkin then asked a chilling question: “Do you support the use of active duty military in supporting detention camps?”
“Senator, everything we would do will be lawful and under the Constitution…” Hegseth replied.
“Ok, I’ll take that as a yes,” Slotkin replied as Hegseth rambled on about how Trump would secure the border.
This was a remarkable exchange between Slotkin and Hegseth. In question after question, Pete Hegseth dodged and deflected, refusing to make key commitments. Hegseth refused to say he would push back on unlawful orders from Trump, refused to say whether he would support using active duty military against U.S. citizens, and refused to say whether he supports using the military at migrant detention camps.
For most of the hearing, if you tuned in with no context, you would think the greatest threat to America’s national security was too many Black people, women, and trans people in the military. We heard more about Pete Hegseth’s plans to take on “wokeness” than we heard about his plans to take on our foreign adversaries.
But of all the exchanges during this hearing, Senator Slotkin delivered the clearest view of how potentially subservient to Donald Trump’s whims Pete Hegseth could truly be as Secretary of Defense.
Judging by how Senate Republicans behaved, Hegseth could very well be confirmed. It’s clear to me that in Hegseth, Trump would have a loyalist eager to implement his worst impulses. Let’s hope that Hegseth’s own fear of violating the law himself is a buffer on what orders he’d be willing to go along with.
Thank you, Ahmed. I was riveted from beginning to end. And he avoided answering so many questions that it made my head spin. When he described the president-elect as an excellent CEO, I was hollering at the screen. Thankfully one of the committee members corrected that mischaracterization quite firmly. As was stated clearly by several members, this man is completely unfit to be SecDef.