There's trouble brewing for Pete Hegseth. Apparently the Armed Services Committee takes seriously the nomination of someone to head up our armed services:
At least a dozen senators are pushing to see the FBI’s background check on Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s embattled pick for Pentagon chief — a rare move for the committee that oversees his confirmation and a sign the former Fox News host still faces hurdles in the Senate.
....Senators have various motives for seeking the report. Some Republicans, such as Collins and North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, say the claims are serious enough to warrant greater access to the findings. While it’s unlikely the FBI findings would be made public, they could still give Republican senators political cover to vote against Hegseth or support his defense.
....Hegseth’s background check, which was delayed by Trump’s initial reluctance to sign agreements with the FBI, would likely move forward on an expedited timeline. The investigations, which usually take weeks, could get fast-tracked to finish before Hegseth’s confirmation hearing, expected on Jan. 14.
There are certain committees that take their jobs a little more seriously—and less politically—than others. Armed Services is one; Intelligence is another. I'm not making any predictions, but I wouldn't be surprised if Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard have a tougher time in their hearings than most of Trump's other nominees.
Hegseth seems to be trying to call what he did youthful indiscretions...as one would expect from someone in their...30's....wait, what???
Well, it worked for George W. Bush. He pulled off the "youthful indiscretions" schtick for antics he did in his 40s. Remember, IOKIYAAR.
The original "youthful indiscretion" poster boy was Henry Hyde. From Wikipedia:
While Hyde was spearheading the impeachment of President Bill Clinton amid the revelations of the Clinton–Lewinsky affair, it was revealed that Hyde himself had conducted an extramarital sexual affair with a former beauty stylist named Cherie Snodgrass, who was also married. Hyde admitted to the affair and attributed the relationship as a "youthful indiscretion". He was 41 years old and married when the affair occurred. Hyde said the affair ended when Snodgrass' husband confronted Mrs. Hyde. At the time, Snodgrass was 29, also married and had three children.
And this is the Henry Hyde, author of the zombie "Hyde Amendment" which must be attached to each and every spending bill to make sure that no federal money can ever be spent on abortion services.
Congressfolk refuse to just let it die and be buried, like Mr Hyde himself.
Both Hegseth and Gabbard are horrible candidates. Hegseth, beyond being a bad human, is completely unqualified. Gabbard, while not well qualified, the opposition to her focuses on her conflicts of interest (support for Assad of Syria etc).
My guess, if only one falls, that Hegseth is dust...
Agreed. I love how the sign that Hegseth might be in trouble is that the committee is pushing to see an FBI background check.
Like, the man is so farcically unqualified it shouldn't matter what's in his background check--the alcoholism, the potential sexual abuse, etc.--he could be a saint with an unblemished background, he just is not a serious pick for the position. He's a dubious weekend talking head whose assets appear to be nice hair and a proclivity for saying stupid and provacative things rooted in 80s pop-culture about vaguely military-flavored topics. He's worse than a clown (clowns know they are ridiculous, and work hard at being ridiculous); Hegseth is just a D-list idiot with no relevant experience or accomplishments.
Imagine: would any board of any decently-sized defense contractor in the country consider picking Hegseth as CEO? Of course not. So why do we all stroke our chins and muse about whether this or that revelation could impede his nomination, rather than just loudly concluding that Once Again Trump is in over his head, as demonstrated by the fact that he thinks the people he sees on TeeVee are smart and somehow his friends. Trump is like a small child in this, and Hegseth's nomination just confirms it.
Completely agree. Of course, when you ask
> Imagine: would any board of any decently-sized defense contractor in the country consider picking Hegseth as CEO?
it's enlightening to run the same thought experiment on Donald Trump.
Absolutely. Trump inherited a huge sum of money from his slumlord dad, and then proceeded to completely underperform the S&P500 for decade after decade. If you can't beat the index really for any significant period over half a century, you are bad, bad, bad at business, and nobody will want to hire you or invest with you.
Which is more or less what we see with Trump.
Except 77 million Americans hired the fucking moron to run the country for the next four years.
Well, yeah, my point isn't that that didn't happen, but that nobody acting rationally would hire either Hegseth or Trump for any position of significant authority.
Realistically, what they hired was a hit man who promised to break the establishment hold that two bought and paid for political parties have on the country.
"Realistically, what they hired was"
Not at all "realistically." It's a goddamn bit of insanity to conclude that because the parties are "bought and paid for" by "the establishment" the best guy for president is a billionaire.
All those billionaires in his inner circle, yesiree, they are all eager to shake things up and look out for the little guy.
Except 77 million *fucking* Americans hired the fucking moron to run the country for the next four years. FIFY
77million gullible marks were taken in by a grifter conman.
“The fucking moron to run the country”
Who are you talking about? Donald or Leon?
I have to say that after all these years I was unaware that besides President and Vice President the Constitution also calls for a co-President. I guess it took Donald Trump to figure that out.
Periodic reminder: "Elon Musk" is actually a short-form nickname; his real name is "Elongated Muskrat."
I think that it's important that we all frequently repeat that when referring to him.
The stories about drinking and immorality have in fact worked in Hegseth's favor, distracting attention from his total unsuitability for the position. Democratic senators should focus completely on his lack of qualifications in public hearings, getting him to condemn himself out of his own mouth with relentless questions along the lines of "What changes would you make in this part of the DoD?/How on earth do you intend to do that?/Your word salad overlooks concrete obstacles A, B and C".
Let Republicans bring up his drinking and alleged sexual assault if they want to.
Gabbard is also completely unqualified due to her lifelong membership in a weird Maui based cult that is a big time money launderer, she was groomed by the cult leader from childhood, her parents were leaders in the cult and her husband was in the cult as were many of her congressional staffers when she was in congress. She used to pass around new clips from RT, the well known Russian propaganda outfit as serious news too.
Gabbard won't make it because why would republicans support her?
Only if Trump folds and gives in. The Republicans in congress are not principled people, they pretty obviously aren't bothered by this behavior to risk even the smallest personal convenience. If Trump wants his guy, congress will fold and no-one will be surprised.
I am afraid you’re right. I think the R Senators are hoping the threat of a negative FBI report will force Hegseth to withdraw. Which he won’t do unless he’s told to by TFM. Or by Supreme Leader Musk.
They're having a confirmation hearing on Jan. 14? Trump can't actually nominate anyone until he's sworn in as President. I mean, obviously they can have a hearing on anything they want, including checking out a potential nominee, but it won't actually be a nomination hearing since the nomination won't be official.
Research says that hearings cannot commence until after inauguration since the nomination can only be submitted by a sitting president.
This happens all the time. Biden's nominations were also considered before he took office.
Hearings can occur anytime. Voting can't commence til inauguration.
Hesgeth got the nod because Sterling Hayden and George C. Scott, who both looked more like defense secretaries than Hesgeth, are long since dead. Kevin Costner looks sort of defense secretarish maybe he should apply for the job.
The fact that he made it this far is why we are all in more trouble than he is in.
The fact that he
made it this farwas nominated in the first place is why we are all in more trouble than he is in.+1
I wonder if this assignment was given to the section of the FBI that also performed a “background check” on “Beer Me” Kavanaugh? You know, the section that knows how to avoid any line of questioning or investigation that might lead to Something Bad being discovered.
What an embarrassment for democrats that whole Kananaugh situation was.
lol.
In a sane and law abiding country, Kavanaugh would not be qualified to be judge of the local school spelling bee contest. In the US he was made a fucking Judge in the Supreme Court.
"What an embarrassment . . ."
Kavanaugh was the guy who was cringeworthy embarrassing. Jeebus, the way he weeped and screeched and yammered about how much he liked beer, while whining like an entitled 12-year old. Way too emotional--get a hold of yourself, dummy! The term "sober as a judge" exists for a reason.
Presumably Christopher Wray is no longer inclined to help Trump.
In your heart of hearts, do you want to see a rapid succession of people crashing and burning from their sheer incompetence and inherent flaws from their personal life spilling out into the public, exposing the chaos we've all come to expect from an incompetent man at the top?
Or do you want competent people carrying out Project 2025?
I'll take option A, please. Unfortunately, the option I really want isn't on offer with this administration. I don't want Project 2025 to go forward at all, unless it's into the garbage dump of history.
Right? So, if you're a Democratic senator at Hegseth's nomination hearing, wouldn't you turn the mic on and say, "I don't think you're qualified nor are you competent, but I don't want a qualified and competent person carrying out Trump's Project 2025, so I'm going to vote for you."
Imagine the twists and turns Republicans will do, demanding Trump pull Hegseth's nomination.
Except the reporting on such a tactic would all be:
"Today, Trump's pick for Secretary of Defense was confirmed by bipartisan majorities, granting an early victory in the Senate to the newly-inaugurated president. While some senators expresed concerns about Hegseth's qualifications, they nonetheless voted to confirm him for the position."
But what does that alternate narrative accomplish for the alt-facts folks? This is Trump's nominee.
I think that it's pretty obvious that voting against somebody because they are incompetent is an easier narrative to get across than is voting for someone because they are incompetent.
You act as if the job of elected Democrats is to fight elected Republicans. It's not. It's to govern.
Not in critical national security positions, no.
I guess the question is, do you think Trump's national security positions and priorities are good for the country? Might they be disastrous?
You might be picking the least worst option.
Asking to see the FBI background check is a “rare move”? Really?
President Musk has at least made sure Hegseth's incompetence would not be an embarrassment in dealing with his Army, Navy and Air Force Secretaries. None of them knows anything at all about the military.
Kevin’s final ‘graph comports fairly well with reality as understood by to retired Feds (total of 65 years combined career federal civil service. Those financial disclosure forms and security clearance forms are among the most nitpicking, and painful bits of paper ever invented. You not only report on yourself but also your spouse, ex-spouses parents, children, children’s spouses—you get the idea. The higher the level of security the more questions. In our day, the “receivers” of the information didn’t accept it at face value, either. For the higher level clearances, they sent people out to do interviews and checked everything.
True story: my very first go round with this was in 1975 as a newly hired GS 11. I was only 23, and didn’t have much “history.” They needed someone who had known me for at least 10 years. The only person I could think of was my high school Latin teacher; when the OPM person arrived on her doorstep, she made him wait there while she called my mom to make sure this was on the up and up.
Long ago. Nowadays, Trump just gives the clearances and bypasses the entire procedure.
Here’s Kevin’s fatal paragraph:
“ There are certain committees that take their jobs a little more seriously—and less politically—than others. Armed Services is one; Intelligence is another. I'm not making any predictions, but I wouldn't be surprised if Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard have a tougher time in their hearings than most of Trump's other nominees.”