Dear America,
I just saw some of the coverage of the Hegseth confirmation hearing news coverage including commentary from both sides of the political spectrum. Unfortunately, the Democrats as they often do were misdirected in their questioning to the extent that it was shown by the media, but I have to add that the Republicans took their customary opportunities to avoid their duty to safeguard the American people by eristic misdirection and casuistry. A Democratic senator focused on whether a record of marital infidelity, drunken debauchery and sexist transgression would be disqualifying for a candidate for a high office, and Hegseth simply brushed the question aside by calling it hypothetical. Ironically, at least in my opinion, he could have just said no, and in the aftermath of the questioning, a Republican senator made that point graphically. He asked his fellow senators if they had ever seen fellow senators come to the senate floor for a night vote drunk, and no one spoke up from the gallery on hand. Then he asked if anyone knew of an example of marital infidelity among senators, and again there was silence...as there probably should have been. In fact, I personally would have included presidents among the perpetrators of such transgression, including Clinton and, yes, the one who has appointed Hegseth, Trump. I might even have added Kennedy. In fact, you could add the same question about sexually inappropriate conversation to candidates for the Supreme Court and get the same response from senators who confirmed Clarence Thomas in spite of the fact that he committed such to the chagrin of one Anita Hill, though in his case I would have voted against him because he lied about other things during his hearing while under oath...but that's another story.
But one Democratic senator asked a question during the hearing that was undoubtedly of central importance for a nominee for the position that controls the mightiest military on earth. Hegseth was asked if he would carry out an illegal order if Donald Trump gave him one. Hegseth's answer? That's hypothetical was not followed up by pointing out that Donald Trump has done a lot of illegal things, not to mention inappropriate things for which he was assessed damages of $85 million, and lying about the subject matter of that case for a second penalty of $5 million. He was convicted of filing records embodying lies under oath that led to 34 felony count convictions. Add to all that countless frauds against people with whom he did business of one kind or another. In that context, the question of whether he would direct Hegseth to give an illegal order is no longer hypothetical. It is rather just a matter of time, which leads to this conclusion: Hegseth will do Trump's bidding, illegal or not, and that disqualifies him whether even though his past peccadilloes may not. The man Donald Trump has chosen to chair the Defense Department's operations has confessed that he will be an abettor to a high crime if his patron, even if it violates the Posse-Commitatus Act of 1878 as amended, if then-president Donald Trump asks it of him. A man like Pete Hegseth is a threat to the lives and liberty of all Americans who disapprove of anything Donald Trump does if those Americans chose to speak out about it en masse, as our constitution's first amendment guarantees them the right to do. Pete Hegseth is a potential accessory to tyrannical acts of the man who precipitated the January 6 insurrection, and he is unabashed about his allegiance.
So take this all as a portent of things to come. Donald Trump has nominated people for leadership positions in his administration and cabinet who's loyalty to him is their only qualification and who, in the bargain, share Trump's disregard for the basic values on which our constitutional democracy is founded and on which it depends. This isn't political. It is existential and foundational. Donald Trump has begun to assemble a mafia that will be armed with the most profound power we have seen since Nero and Caligula.
You may find my point hysterical or irrational, but what do you think will eventuate if I'm right? And by the way, time may be of the essence. Pay attention to how your senators vote on these nominees because the elections in two years could be your last chance to do the prudent thing, and your last opportunity to protect what I am sure you have heard called "The American Experiment." We should all be cognizant of the fact that just like forest fires, only you can prevent this.
Your friend,
Mike
I just saw some of the coverage of the Hegseth confirmation hearing news coverage including commentary from both sides of the political spectrum. Unfortunately, the Democrats as they often do were misdirected in their questioning to the extent that it was shown by the media, but I have to add that the Republicans took their customary opportunities to avoid their duty to safeguard the American people by eristic misdirection and casuistry. A Democratic senator focused on whether a record of marital infidelity, drunken debauchery and sexist transgression would be disqualifying for a candidate for a high office, and Hegseth simply brushed the question aside by calling it hypothetical. Ironically, at least in my opinion, he could have just said no, and in the aftermath of the questioning, a Republican senator made that point graphically. He asked his fellow senators if they had ever seen fellow senators come to the senate floor for a night vote drunk, and no one spoke up from the gallery on hand. Then he asked if anyone knew of an example of marital infidelity among senators, and again there was silence...as there probably should have been. In fact, I personally would have included presidents among the perpetrators of such transgression, including Clinton and, yes, the one who has appointed Hegseth, Trump. I might even have added Kennedy. In fact, you could add the same question about sexually inappropriate conversation to candidates for the Supreme Court and get the same response from senators who confirmed Clarence Thomas in spite of the fact that he committed such to the chagrin of one Anita Hill, though in his case I would have voted against him because he lied about other things during his hearing while under oath...but that's another story.
But one Democratic senator asked a question during the hearing that was undoubtedly of central importance for a nominee for the position that controls the mightiest military on earth. Hegseth was asked if he would carry out an illegal order if Donald Trump gave him one. Hegseth's answer? That's hypothetical was not followed up by pointing out that Donald Trump has done a lot of illegal things, not to mention inappropriate things for which he was assessed damages of $85 million, and lying about the subject matter of that case for a second penalty of $5 million. He was convicted of filing records embodying lies under oath that led to 34 felony count convictions. Add to all that countless frauds against people with whom he did business of one kind or another. In that context, the question of whether he would direct Hegseth to give an illegal order is no longer hypothetical. It is rather just a matter of time, which leads to this conclusion: Hegseth will do Trump's bidding, illegal or not, and that disqualifies him whether even though his past peccadilloes may not. The man Donald Trump has chosen to chair the Defense Department's operations has confessed that he will be an abettor to a high crime if his patron, even if it violates the Posse-Commitatus Act of 1878 as amended, if then-president Donald Trump asks it of him. A man like Pete Hegseth is a threat to the lives and liberty of all Americans who disapprove of anything Donald Trump does if those Americans chose to speak out about it en masse, as our constitution's first amendment guarantees them the right to do. Pete Hegseth is a potential accessory to tyrannical acts of the man who precipitated the January 6 insurrection, and he is unabashed about his allegiance.
So take this all as a portent of things to come. Donald Trump has nominated people for leadership positions in his administration and cabinet who's loyalty to him is their only qualification and who, in the bargain, share Trump's disregard for the basic values on which our constitutional democracy is founded and on which it depends. This isn't political. It is existential and foundational. Donald Trump has begun to assemble a mafia that will be armed with the most profound power we have seen since Nero and Caligula.
You may find my point hysterical or irrational, but what do you think will eventuate if I'm right? And by the way, time may be of the essence. Pay attention to how your senators vote on these nominees because the elections in two years could be your last chance to do the prudent thing, and your last opportunity to protect what I am sure you have heard called "The American Experiment." We should all be cognizant of the fact that just like forest fires, only you can prevent this.
Your friend,
Mike
Leave a comment