Fact Check: Secretary Hegseth's Refusal to Answer Military Force Questions is Appalling
What We Know
During a recent congressional hearing, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth faced intense questioning from Senator Mazie Hirono regarding his handling of military deployments and the potential use of force against U.S. citizens. Senator Hirono expressed significant concern about Hegseth's leadership at the Department of Defense (DOD), stating that he had turned the Pentagon into a "dysfunctional mess" and jeopardized military operations by texting classified military plans to unauthorized individuals (Hirono Presses Secretary Hegseth).
Hirono specifically pressed Hegseth on whether he would comply with court orders regarding the legality of deploying nearly 5,000 troops in Los Angeles, which had been done without the consent of local authorities. Hegseth notably refused to explicitly commit to following a potential court ruling, stating, "I don't believe district courts should be determining national security policy, but when it goes to the Supreme Court we’ll see" (Hirono Presses Secretary Hegseth). Furthermore, when asked if he would use military force against U.S. citizens, he did not rule out such actions, which raised alarms about the politicization of the military (Hirono Presses Secretary Hegseth).
Analysis
The claim that Secretary Hegseth's refusal to answer questions about military force is "appalling" is supported by the context of his responses during the hearing. His reluctance to commit to following court orders and his failure to rule out the use of military force against civilians suggest a concerning stance on the limits of military engagement within the U.S.
Hegseth's responses were characterized by evasiveness, particularly when pressed on whether he would follow orders that could lead to violence against peaceful protesters. This behavior aligns with previous criticisms of his leadership style, which has been described as lacking accountability and transparency (Hegseth Refuses to Answer One Easy Question). The refusal to provide clear answers in a high-stakes context, especially regarding the use of military force against civilians, raises ethical and legal concerns about the role of the military in domestic affairs.
Moreover, the source of this information, including the video of the hearing and various news reports, provides a reliable account of Hegseth's statements and the surrounding context. The Associated Press and PBS, both reputable news organizations, reported on the hearing and Hegseth's responses, which adds credibility to the claims made about his conduct (Hegseth says Pentagon has contingency plans to invade ..., WATCH: Hegseth won't say whether he allowed the military ...).
Conclusion
The claim that Secretary Hegseth's refusal to answer questions regarding military force is appalling is True. His evasive responses and failure to commit to following legal orders regarding troop deployment indicate a troubling approach to military engagement in domestic situations. Given the serious implications of his statements, particularly concerning the potential use of military force against U.S. citizens, the concerns raised by Senator Hirono and others are justified.
