Dem
47
GOP
53
A month ago, the nomination of Pete Hegseth to lead the Pentagon was on life support. But in the roughly four lifetimes since, Republicans have closed ranks around him. That much was clear from the candidate's confirmation hearing yesterday.
The dynamic that was on display was identical to what we saw during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearing. That is to say, Democrats were playing offense, and asking probing questions about Hegseth's background and record. Meanwhile, Republicans were playing defense, and primarily using their questions (and comments) as a means to downplay the more problematic elements of Hegseth's résumé.
What were the Democrats' lines of attack? Well, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) went after Hegseth over the candidate's alleged sexual assault(s). Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) wondered why Hegseth had made himself available to meet with the Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee, but not the Democrats. Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) asked if there were any orders that Donald Trump might issue that would violate the Constitution (she specifically alluded to an order to invade Greenland). Several of the women on the Committee, including Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) had concerns about Hegseth's past (and ongoing?) opposition to women in combat roles. "You say you want to keep our forces strong by not lowering standards [to admit women for combat roles]," said the decorated combat veteran Duckworth. "Then let's not lower our standards for you."
The extent to which Republicans were willing to twist themselves into pretzels to excuse Hegseth's past bad behavior was, to be blunt, almost comical. The most... notable example is surely Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), who took the position that the candidate's alcohol abuse/alleged alcoholism is a non-issue because nobody is perfect. He thundered:
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?
Later in the day, Mullin appeared on CNN and reiterated his point, telling host Kaitlin Collins that if she's allowed to drink alcohol and keep her job, then he sees no reason that a Secretary of Defense should be held to a different standard.
We have no idea if Mullin really believes what he's saying. It's very possible, since—how can we put this delicately?—he's in competition with Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) for the honor of being the least sharp knife in the Senate drawer. In any case, the counterpoints to Mullin's argument are obvious. First, it's perfectly fine for a Secretary of Defense, or any other Cabinet officer, to imbibe. Hegseth's issue is that he drinks to excess, to the point of being non-functional. Second, if Kaitlin Collins or Markwayne Mullin or 99.9% of other people show up to work too incapacitated to function, nobody is going to die. By contrast, if the person leading the Pentagon can't answer the bell when, say, Iran lobs a missile at Israel some Tuesday morning at 2:00 a.m., people very well could die.
Hegseth, for his part, adopted the usual tack (for nominees of both parties) of just not answering questions he did not want to answer. For example, he dodged Slotkin's question about illegal orders with the remark that he could not imagine Trump issuing any illegal orders. If he really and truly can't even imagine it, then he's the only one. Hegseth also pandered to his audience by talking a whole lot about God, Jesus, and Donald Trump. That's the father, the son, and the Unholy Spirit. It was not clear if Hegseth regards the three as being one and the same, however.
Once the show was over, Hegseth got the endorsement he needed the most, as Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) promptly announced that she will vote for confirmation. Nearly every other Republican showed their hand yesterday with their questions and comments, so surely the rest will vote to confirm. And once a candidate has the seal of approval from the relevant committee, it's virtually unheard of for them to be rejected by the Senate as a whole.
We should point out that the Republican senators—well, most of them, at least—know full well Hegseth is not qualified for this job. But they are scared to death of being primaried, and Trump has made getting Hegseth approved a point of focus, so they are going to swallow hard and bestow their votes. It's not impossible that four Republicans over whom Trump has limited power—say, Mitch McConnell (R-KY) because he is likely retiring, Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Susan Collins (R-ME) because they have to answer to purplish electorates, and John Curtis because Utah Republicans aren't too Trumpy—band together to sink Hegseth. But it's not likely.
So, does this suggest that Trump is going to sneak all of his most problematic and controversial nominees—Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, etc.—through the process? It very well could mean that. However, we will point out that Hegseth's position is a little different from the others, in two ways. The first is that he would assume leadership of a department that already has a lot of careerists who know what they are doing (e.g., the Joint Chiefs of Staff). It would not be too hard for a leery Republican to persuade themselves, we think, that the high-ranking brass will limit the amount of damage Hegseth can actually do.
The second is that Hegseth wants to fight the culture wars fights that Republican politicians want to fight—not in search of national security, but in search of votes. Take a look at this picture of Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) at yesterday's hearing:
Clearly, the Senator (or whoever makes his poster boards) cannot spell. But the more important point is that he seized upon this as an opportunity to lambaste DEI, which has become the latest Republican buzzword, and a pretty clear dog whistle for "minorities and women and LGBTQ people." We foresee a lot of appearances by Hegseth on Fox, his former employer, where he'll carp about DEI and trans people and women who don't know their place and the like, and Republican voters (and politicians) will just eat it up.
For Kennedy and Gabbard, there are fewer guardrails keeping them from doing real harm. And their issues are not exactly the Republican talking points du jour. So, we can at least imagine a world where Hegseth makes the cut, but one or both of that duo does not. We're not saying it's likely they will be rejected, merely that it's possible, even if Hegseth sails through the confirmation process, as he appears to be set to do. (Z)