Hegseth FACES HEAT from Dems: Watch MS NOW hosts react to 'stunning' Iran war hearing

[0:00] Today, the Secretary of Defense testified to Congress for the first time since his boss [0:04] started a war with no stated purpose, no strategy, and no clear endgame 58 days ago. [0:11] And during that testimony, in front of the House Armed Services Committee, Pete Hegseth [0:15] reminded all of us that during this time of war, we have the most unqualified, the most [0:22] unprepared, and the most clownish person ever to serve in that role. [0:29] Do you think we're winning? [0:31] Militarily, on the battlefield, it's been an astounding military success. [0:34] But are we winning the war? [0:36] Absolutely. [0:37] Okay, so do you call Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz winning? [0:41] Well, I would say the blockade that we hold that doesn't allow anything to come in or [0:45] out of Iranian ports, which is always in our portfolio to use. [0:47] So we've blockaded their blockade. [0:49] So they blockaded us, and then we blockaded their blockade. [0:53] That's like saying, tag, you're it. [0:56] I mean, what? [0:57] I mean, good on Congressman Moulton for keeping a straight face during that exchange, of course. [1:02] But it didn't stop there. [1:04] There's much more. [1:05] And before I play this next one, remember for months now, months, Hegseth and the entire [1:10] Trump administration have justified the need for the war with Iran by saying that Iran was [1:15] dangerously close to developing a nuclear weapon. [1:17] That's been their mantra. [1:19] Now, today, Hegseth couldn't seem to keep that story straight. [1:25] Their nuclear facilities have been obliterated underground. [1:28] They're buried and we're watching them 24-7. [1:31] So we know where any nuclear material might be. [1:33] Reclaiming my time for just a quick second here. [1:36] We had to start this war, you just said, 60 days ago, because the nuclear weapon was an [1:43] imminent threat. [1:44] Now you're saying that it was completely obliterated? [1:47] They had not given up their nuclear ambitions. [1:52] I mean, the look on Adam Smith's face says it all. [1:55] OK, so with that logic, bombing is not about destroying the facilities. [1:58] It's about making them give up their ambitions through bombing. [2:03] How does that work exactly? [2:05] And then there's what he had to say about the cost of the war. [2:08] Will you acknowledge the economic cost? [2:11] We have an incredible economic team that's managing this better than what the previous [2:16] administration did to our economy. [2:17] What the previous administration did with inflation. [2:20] You don't even know what the previous administration did with COVID. [2:23] And you're going to lecture this administration about the economy. [2:26] You know what is upsetting? [2:27] Incredible. [2:27] You didn't even do the analysis on how much it's costing the American people. [2:31] You don't even know what the average American is paying. [2:34] You don't know what we paid in terms of the missiles that hit the Iranian school. [2:37] You don't know what we're paying in terms of gas. [2:39] You don't know what we're paying in terms of food. [2:41] Your 25 billion number is totally off. [2:44] It's the incompetence. [2:47] And in a hearing that had a lot of alarming moments, the most damning one came when [2:52] Hegseth was asked about the six army reserve soldiers who were killed by an Iranian drone [2:56] striking Kuwait on the first day of the war. [2:59] It remains the deadliest attack on U.S. forces since the Iran war began. [3:03] Six troops were killed. [3:04] Dozens were wounded. [3:05] And at the time, this was how Hegseth explained what happened. [3:10] You have air defenses and a lot's coming in and you hit most of it. [3:13] And we absolutely do. [3:14] We have incredible air defenders. [3:16] Every once in a while, you might have one, unfortunately, we call it a squirter that makes [3:20] its way through. [3:21] And in that particular case, it happened to hit a tactical operations center that was [3:27] fortified. [3:28] But these are powerful weapons. [3:32] It appears that was a lie. [3:34] Survivors of the attack told CBS News that area was not fortified. [3:37] In fact, this particular unit was left dangerously exposed, as they described it. [3:42] One soldier raised serious questions about why he and other troops were moved to this [3:46] command post in Kuwait, which U.S. intelligence showed was on an Iranian target list. [3:51] And in the interview I'm about to show you, CBS hid that soldier's identity because he was [3:55] speaking out without the military's permission. [3:57] We moved closer to Iran, to a deeply unsafe area that was a known target. [4:07] So what was the reason that you were told for why you needed to be there? [4:11] I don't think there was a good reason ever articulated. [4:15] This horrific tragedy and that disgusting response from Pete Hegseth, all of it came to [4:20] a head today when Democratic Congressman Pat Ryan of New York, a combat veteran and Bronze [4:24] Star recipient, got his five minutes with Hegseth. [4:27] Head wounds, heavy bleeding, and then just shrapnel all over. [4:35] So folks are bleeding from their abdomen, bleeding from arms, bleeding from legs. [4:41] Secretary Hegseth, do you know who said that? [4:45] I'm not sure I do. [4:46] It was one of our soldiers describing the devastating Iranian drone strike at Port Shweiba. [4:52] Prior to the attack, officers on the ground knew our troops were vulnerable. [4:56] In fact, they requested additional force protection. [4:58] Did they receive it? [4:59] Wherever humanly possible, force protection and counter-UAS was always made available. [5:06] They did not. [5:09] Now, Congressman Ryan was just getting started, and things only got more heated and tense from [5:14] there. [5:17] So let's be clear, no counter-drone capabilities, no counter-rocket systems, no counter-mortar [5:21] or counter-artillery. [5:22] Not even the basic overhead protection that you and I had 20 years ago in Iraq. [5:28] And now, six of our soldiers are dead. [5:34] The next day, you downplayed the attack. [5:38] You said it was a squirter that squeaked through fortified defenses. [5:43] So are you saying that these soldiers, our soldiers, who survived this horrific attack [5:48] are lying? [5:52] What I'm saying is before the commencement of the conflict, we put in maximum defensive [5:57] posture. [5:58] We could. [5:58] That's a direct contribution to what they said. [6:00] In this directing, can I speak, or are you just going to monologue falsehoods all over [6:04] the place? [6:05] It's not a falsehood. [6:06] We moved 7,500 troops off of the X based on the intel. [6:09] Stop. [6:10] Based on the intel. [6:10] Stop. [6:11] Reclaiming my time. [6:12] Because you yell doesn't make you right. [6:15] Just because you yell doesn't make you right. [6:16] I'm claiming my time on behalf of these survivors. [6:19] You just said what they said is a falsehood. [6:21] Hex has appeared to be performing grossly for an audience of one, as usual, knowing Donald [6:29] Trump was likely watching. [6:30] But to everyone else, he just looked like a liar and a fool. [6:34] Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Pat Ryan of New York. [6:38] What was going through your head? [6:39] The brazenness of literally, these are surviving troops who, by the way, were so intimidated [6:50] by Hex's sort of fear and intimidation campaign that they came forward, but they felt that they [6:55] needed to be anonymized for their own protection. [6:59] And I know a big part of that was they felt like him not taking this seriously. [7:05] I mean, we have 50,000 more troops right now in the theater. [7:10] And if we don't learn those lessons, that's putting them all at risk. [7:15] And to see Hexeth just try to basically bully his way through that rather than taking [7:20] accountability, it was pathetic. [7:22] And so I was pissed. [7:23] Not just personally, but you think about those soldiers we lost, the 30 wounded, their families. [7:30] It's just so disrespectful. [7:33] We've seen you speak at campaign events passionately. [7:37] We've seen you, you know, speak on the floor about a range of issues. [7:40] It seems like Secretary Hexeth particularly gets under your skin and what he has to say. [7:47] Tell us more about that. [7:50] It is both personal, but it's personal because I really do think him being in this position [7:56] of such grave responsibility and seriousness is just so, such an insult to the people that [8:04] are serving, that are doing the right things, that are doing it in an apolitical way from [8:08] a patriotic place of good faith. [8:11] And then he comes in there today, for example, and in his opening remarks, deliberately chooses [8:16] to say our greatest threat is not China or Russia or Iran, who we're at war with, by the way. [8:24] It's Democrats and some Republicans, he said, who are whatever he said, whatever garbage BS [8:31] he said. [8:31] I mean, that just, that in and of itself is both stunning and tells you everything you [8:36] need to know about how he thinks about his job. [8:39] It was, I found it also stunning. [8:41] And it was at the very beginning of the hearing. [8:44] Set the tone. [8:45] And just thinking about how many secretaries of defense we've heard testify, it completely [8:49] stood out to me as well. [8:51] There were so many different moments during this hearing, which I think exposed a lot for [8:57] the public about what's going on here. [8:58] You and I have talked about this a fair amount. [9:01] One of your Democratic colleagues, Congresswoman Houlihan, asked Hegseth to basically just give [9:05] an order of magnitude of how much longer he thought it would take before the operation [9:10] concluded. [9:11] He said he wouldn't say how long he'd be committed to the mission. [9:15] He just wouldn't give any sort of a timeline, like we're not going to telegraph that to the [9:19] enemy. [9:20] That is something I think every single person watching right now, every person in this country [9:25] would love to have a sense of. [9:26] These are our men and women who are serving our resources and so many other impacts. [9:31] What did you make of that refusal? [9:34] Every day, every American is paying the price. [9:36] Some in blood and lives lost. [9:39] All of us in the gas pump, at the grocery store, and so on and so forth. [9:45] And they've tried to do this bizarre, logical pretzel twist where they say, oh, remember how [9:52] long it took in Iraq and Afghanistan and World War II, he talked about. [9:55] And Vietnam. [9:56] Today. [9:57] And then at the same time. [9:58] But these are different. [9:59] These are different. [10:00] And what we're trying to say is, no, we're actually concerned that you're setting us up [10:05] for that same sort of year after year quagmire situation that I served and fought in and [10:12] that we all learned in Iraq and Afghanistan was not what we wanted to do. [10:16] So it's like cognitive dissonance at a level that can only be explained by this blind fealty [10:22] to Trump. [10:23] And Hexeth's whole performance today, and it was a performance, was an audience of one [10:28] to keep his own job and not do his job, which is care for our troops and keep the American [10:34] people safe. [10:35] I wanted to play you a question that your Democratic colleague, you were sitting there, but for [10:40] people who didn't see it, Congressman Milton asked today on Hexeth's no quarter comments. [10:45] And we've talked about this before, so I just wanted to play this and get your thoughts [10:48] about how he responded. [10:52] In a press conference, you said we will give them no quarter, no mercy. [10:56] In order for no quarter or no survivors is a war crime under the Geneva Conventions. [11:00] You understand that's murder. [11:02] Do you stand by that statement? [11:05] The Department of War fights to win, and we ensure that our warfighters have the rules [11:09] of engagement necessary to be as effective as humanly possible. [11:12] You called Democratic members of Congress to be tried for sedition for reminding our troops [11:16] to follow the law. [11:17] But when you tell them to commit a war crime, you stand by yourself. [11:20] For insinuating the laws. [11:24] You could kind of see the disgust on Congressman Milton's face there, but what did you make [11:29] of that moment? [11:30] Again, a moment of deep hypocrisy. [11:33] Hexeth himself in 2016 publicly reminded us that soldiers and military folks are required [11:41] to follow lawful orders. [11:43] But now that he's in this position, again, fealty to Trump comes first. [11:47] And it is disgust, especially for those of us that served in uniform. [11:51] He has brought an office we all held in such great regard, the Secretary of Defense, where [11:58] you want a wise, sober, serious leader, down to not even in a weekday Fox News host, a weekend [12:07] Fox News host. [12:08] And that's, again, what we saw on display today. [12:11] I look forward to sharing the incredible successes of our military, achieved in a matter of weeks. [12:20] President Trump, unlike other presidents, has had the courage to ensure Iran never gets [12:25] a nuclear weapon, and he's ironclad in that. [12:29] We're the best negotiator in the world driving that deal. [12:31] The biggest challenge, the biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless, feckless, [12:40] and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans. [12:47] How sad. [12:48] How sad, first of all, that a child is allowed to hold that position, an immature child that [12:54] doesn't even understand. [12:57] There's so many things he doesn't understand. [12:59] But the first thing he doesn't understand is that the people that are on that committee [13:02] are members of the Armed Services Committee. [13:04] And as a former member of the Armed Services Committee, I can tell you most of those people [13:09] have military bases in their district. [13:12] Most of those people represent the men and women in uniform that fight for this country, [13:18] that are deployed across the world, that are deployed across the Middle East. [13:21] And their first concern is the safety and the security of those soldiers and sailors, airmen, [13:30] Marines, Coast Guard members. [13:32] That's their concern. [13:34] And this guy acts like a punk, a little punk, saying that those members of the Armed Services [13:43] Committee who, mind you, who, mind you, are actually fulfilling the oath before country [13:51] and God that they gave and following the orders, not of one president, but of our founding fathers [14:01] in the Constitution, to have oversight over an administration, any administration, just like [14:09] we did with the Clinton administration, just like we did with the Bush administration, just [14:13] like Republicans did with the Obama administration. [14:16] That is what they take an oath to do. [14:20] And Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defense, just said that these Article I representatives [14:30] were a greater adversary to America than Iran's Revolutionary Guard, than Iran's mullahs. [14:42] A greater adversary than all of those groups, the terrorist proxy groups that are trying to kill [14:52] our soldiers every day. [14:55] Isn't it pretty remarkable? [14:59] Pretty remarkable that we've been lectured by MAGA World over the past week that you can't say [15:06] anything. [15:07] You can't say, oh, the president's acting like an authoritarian, because you may get him killed. [15:12] The president is actually, he's acting like a fascist, or he's speaking, he's using fascist rhetoric. [15:21] So you can't say that. You can't say that because you might cause people to shoot him. [15:26] It's as if the two go together. And here you have Pete Hegseth saying that members of Congress doing [15:33] their constitutional job are greater threats, greater threats than the Revolutionary Guardian. [15:40] Listen, just for the record, as Jonathan Chape pointed out in The Atlantic a couple of days ago, [15:45] Donald Trump regularly calls his opponents that he disagrees with. Communists, traitors, [15:53] people who need to be shot in the face. So it's just such nonsense. It really is. And I really, [16:00] and I understand hacks doing it. I understand hacks. But when the Wall Street Journal editorial page [16:06] and the National Review goes down that tired line, it's crazy. It's just, it's absolutely crazy. [16:14] So here we have, Willie, a secretary of defense that says the greatest adversary to U.S. troops right [16:24] now, not the Revolutionary Guard, but members of Congress who want to know, I don't know, basic [16:30] things. How much money have we spent there? We finally got the answer yesterday. What actually are [16:37] the reasons why we went to war? Because he really still didn't give us a clearly defined answer. [16:42] He did say, and I'm glad he said it, there can never be a nuclear Iran. So if he decides, [16:51] and this administration decides to cut and run, while Iran still has nuclear weapons, [16:58] then, well, I guess by his own definition, there's a failure. But another thing happened [17:03] yesterday, and I swear to God, it's just, I don't know if they're children or they think that [17:07] everybody that follows them are children. But we heard once again yesterday, them kind of juggling the [17:13] ball saying, we destroyed Iran's nuclear capability. Oh, okay, great. We have to go to war because [17:22] Iran's two weeks away from having a nuclear weapon. Wait, but you destroyed it a year ago. Now you're [17:28] saying they're two weeks away. And we had the same sort of tap dance yesterday. We can't leave until [17:33] their nuclear programs destroyed. Oh, the president destroyed their nuclear program. So this, this whole [17:39] thing, again, it's an embarrassing exercise. And I do mean this. He's not only, it's not only [17:46] embarrassing for the United States of America. I keep saying this. It's embarrassing for the [17:51] Republican Party. It's embarrassing for the president of the United States who deserves and needs [17:57] somebody better running the Pentagon than this child who embarrasses Donald Trump every time he goes out [18:04] and talks. Yeah, these performances that we see from Pete Hegsworth once a week or so are designed to [18:10] humor the president, to please the president, to get a pat on the back from the president. [18:14] But as you say, they're not helping the president in this war effort at all. [18:17] And any basic question, the ones you just laid out, how much does the war cost? Did you not see the [18:23] consequences of war like the Strait of Hormuz potentially being closed, which every, every former [18:30] military leader we've had on this show said that's one of the first questions you ask. When the [18:34] subject of Iran comes up, the next question is, what about the Strait of Hormuz? The cost of gas is [18:40] now $4.23. All of these consequences, all of these outcomes, did you not consider them? [18:46] And the response to that from Secretary Heggsworth yesterday is why, effectively, why do you hate [18:51] America? Why are you rooting against the war? You're the actual bad guys. If you deign to criticize [18:56] or ask questions about this war, you're rooting against America. That's just not how it works here [19:02] in America, Jonathan Lemire. But President Trump seems to like Secretary Heggsworth, likes his [19:08] combativeness, likes the way he performs. He sort of adopted the language of Donald Trump. And so [19:14] there he sits at the head of the Pentagon as this war drags on, frankly, with no end in sight. [19:20] Secretary Heggsworth, frankly, doesn't have that many allies or friends within the White House, [19:24] but he has the only one that matters. President Trump likes him, loves the performative outrage [19:28] that we see in those briefings at the Pentagon and likely yesterday. It's worth highlighting this. [19:34] We just showed what Heggsworth said, that the biggest adversary we face at this point are the [19:38] reckless, feckless, and defeatist words of congressional Democrats. [19:42] A few moments later, when General Cain gave his opening remarks, he included a line about General [19:47] George C. Marshall's commitment to a nonpartisan military, saying, quote, [19:51] that remains a constant standard and something I borrow from often. So General Cain, the chairman [19:57] of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, saying what you should say there, the military is not supposed [20:02] to be political. Secretary Heggsworth not doing the same. And we, as Willie just said, [20:07] there are real ramifications for this war. There are no negotiations planned. The strait of Hormuz [20:11] is shut. Yes, U.S. officials believe the blockade is working, but we have a long way to go. [20:17] And overnight, oil prices surged, hitting a fresh wartime high, Joe and Mika. And right now, [20:23] the Trump administration is looking for a way out without an obvious answer. [20:28] Well, let's commend General Cain, first of all, for using as his North Star, General George [20:35] Marshall, who never voted in an election, as his father never voted in an election. He always stayed [20:43] away from politics, did everything he could to do that. He was a soldier first. And so when you, [20:49] when you see this petulant display, I can say, people can say, oh, Donald Trump likes it. I don't [20:56] know. He didn't like it when Pam Bondi did it. And yesterday reminded me of Pam Bondi's performance, [21:02] the worst performance on Capitol Hill, I think, certainly I've ever seen before the Armed Services [21:07] Committee when you actually tell Republicans and Democrats that they are a greater adversary [21:15] than the Revolutionary Guard, that they are a greater adversary than the Mullahs, the Ayatollahs [21:23] in Iran, that they're a greater adversary than the government that has actually run a state that's [21:32] the epicenter of terrorism since 1979. And here's what is lost for President Trump. Oil prices are going [21:41] up. If you actually had a grownup going there and explain, listen, we understand oil prices are [21:47] going up and we feel terrible for the American people. This is what we're calculating, though. [21:52] We could, we, we, we need to keep the blockade in place because we understand we've degraded [21:58] their military targets. Our military is the best in the world. They can't do any better than they've [22:03] done. And we're just so damn proud of them. But at this point, the real pressure point with the [22:08] Iranians is now economic. We've done everything we can do militarily and we've done it well. And we're [22:15] so proud of that. But now our military is going to be used to choke their economy off. And that at the [22:23] end of the day is what's going to bring them to the negotiating table so we can have a safe Iran. We [22:29] can have a safe region. We can have a safe world free, free from a nuclear Iran. If somebody, [22:37] if the right person had said that for the Trump administration, people would understand, okay, [22:43] yes, oil is going to go up for the next week or two. But on the other side of it, you have the UAE [22:49] proving what great allies they are getting out of OPEC because they say they want to be reliable [22:57] partners to the United States. So there was a way to do that. But because he decided to go full [23:02] Bondi and, you know, that was full Bondi. You know, Willie, I think, I think we all know this. [23:11] You never go full Bondi, right? You never go full Bondi. No. It never works. And he went full [23:19] Bondi. Man, you don't go full Bondi. You don't do it. You went full Bondi. You've just cited a new term, [23:24] I think, that's going to be used throughout the briefings that we've seen from Secretary Hags. [23:28] By the way, your point about the nuclear program and ambitions is an important one because despite [23:33] what he was saying yesterday in June of 2025, after Operation Midnight Hammer, Secretary Hags has [23:39] said, quote, Iran's nuclear ambitions have been obliterated. It's over. That was 10 months ago. [23:45] And now the defense of the war, which is, you know, it's warranted if there's still nuclear material [23:52] and nuclear program. He says, no, no, no, we've got to stop. We might've wiped out their capabilities, [23:57] but they still have the ambition. That's why we have to keep fighting in Iran. [24:02] Let's look at the big picture with us. Author and staff writer for The Atlantic, [24:07] Anne Applebaum and decorated combat veteran and former commander of U.S. Army Europe, [24:12] retired Army Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, who we are happy to say is joining MSNOW as a military [24:20] analyst. And that is a reason to strike up the band. We're going to get onto Ukraine in a minute, [24:26] General, because so much is going on right now. We are literally seeing history move before our eyes. [24:33] It's extraordinary what the Ukrainians are doing every day. But I want to first have you comment [24:39] on what we saw yesterday. It's too easy, quite frankly, to continue criticizing this child's [24:47] performance. What I'd like you to tell our viewers is, what should a mature sec deaf in the middle of [24:59] the war said to Congress yesterday? What would you have liked to hear? [25:05] Yeah, Joe, it's a great question, because first of all, we have to review what this hearing was [25:10] supposed to be all about. The center point of this hearing was to defend a $1.45 trillion [25:16] request for a bump up in the Defense Department budget. I didn't hear a whole lot of discussion [25:24] about the budget at all. That's a 40 percent increase in what they were initially given by [25:30] the NDAA. So that kind of fell by the wayside. And the second thing I'd say, having testified before [25:38] members of Congress myself, the disrespect that was shown by the Secretary of Defense to the [25:44] an organization that has First Amendment powers of basically questioning different department [25:51] heads about what they're doing in an oversight role was just, to me, beyond the pale. There was [25:59] smirks. There was bad body language. There was arguments. There was over-talking. And again, [26:05] having myself testified before Congress, that's just not a way to win the approval of the budget that [26:14] you're trying to submit. You know, there's 50 percent, almost 50 percent of the Congress now [26:19] that just sees the Secretary as someone who is going to bluster, who's going to talk about things, [26:26] who's going to over-talk and not answer questions. So in and of itself, I mean, even some of the [26:34] answers he was giving in terms of the cost of the war, trying to answer good questions about potential [26:41] war crimes that were committed, responsibility and accountability of him and the force. [26:47] There is no one questioning the actions of the U.S. military. They have been magnificent in what they [26:54] have been asked to do. I have not seen a single person say that, you know, the military actions have [27:00] been bad. What the question is, is what's the end state? What comes after the military? What hits [27:07] the next sets of decisive points in Iran, according to the theorist Jomani, and how do you get to the [27:16] center of gravity to get them at the negotiating table? That's all by the wayside right now. And [27:22] it's just confusing to me how he can, to use your term, go full Bondi and expect any kind of [27:31] coordination with the members of Congress who give him the money that he needs for the Defense [27:37] Department. He went full Bondi. You never go full Bondi. Let me say this in a way that the president [27:42] will, may understand, and I'm dead serious. Not only is it disrespectful, I know the president has no [27:51] problem with that, but I've sat through hundreds of these hearings on the Armed Services Committee. [27:55] It's ineffective. It's ineffective. It's ineffective. It's ineffective to everybody. Republicans and [28:00] Democrats that may be split on other issues will come together afterwards, and they'll stick it to [28:06] him. Every chance they get moving forward, it's ineffective. It's like using a 60 wedge, you know, [28:14] when you're driving on a par five or taking out a driver when you're 20 yards from the green. [28:19] Nobody does it. There's a reason they don't do it. It's ineffective. So Pete Hegseth went full Bondi, [28:27] and it's only going to hurt him with the committee. It's only going to hurt him with the Congress. [28:31] It's only going to hurt him with this war effort. So senators joins me now. Tammy Duckworth, thank you [28:38] very much for taking the time out of the hearing to be with us. We've got a lot to cover, and I want to [28:43] start, if I can, with a claim that Secretary Hegseth made about the 60-day deadline to get congressional [28:50] authorization for the war in Iran. I want to play that exchange. Is the president intending to either [28:59] seek congressional authorization for the war in Iran or send us the legally required certification [29:06] that he needs an additional 30 days to remove U.S. forces from the war? Ultimately, I would defer to the [29:13] White House and White House counsel on that. However, we are in a ceasefire right now, which our [29:17] understanding means the 60-day clock pauses or stops in a ceasefire. So you're not in. That's our [29:24] understanding, just so you know. Okay. Well, I do not believe the statute would support that. [29:28] Senator, is it your understanding that the 60-day clock on the war powers resolution is currently [29:35] stopped because of a ceasefire? And so tomorrow, the president would not be required to seek [29:40] congressional approval or end hostilities? Yeah, there's no stopping the clock. He has a maximum [29:47] of 60 days to come to Congress to justify the war. And he's supposed to provide us with evidence and [29:55] proof of imminent danger that, you know, we were going to come under attack imminently. [30:01] The last day that he can do that is tomorrow. So this is a fake deadline that they've come up with [30:07] by reading the law backwards. But this is what the Trump administration does, is they keep firing [30:13] legal counsels until they get one who will say exactly what they want to say. And now, [30:17] as we approach their fake 60-day deadline, I'm imploring my Republican colleagues to stop [30:22] abandoning their constitutional duty and finally join us in reigning in Trump's disastrous, [30:27] costly war. But no, there's no stopping of the clock. The statute says nothing about that. [30:33] So could you be setting—could he be the president, if he doesn't take those actions tomorrow, [30:38] be setting up a constitutional clash? Clash that could unfold over the next couple of weeks? [30:42] Yes, very much so. And I'm outraged that Senate Republicans continue to cede their [30:49] constitutional authority to this warmongering, wannabe dictator of a president. I mean, [30:53] he's hellbound on throwing our service members into needless danger, breaking every single promise [30:57] he's made to the American people. And he's not taking care of business here at home. And now, [31:02] you know, there's this—what they've got, their fake justification. And frankly, [31:07] he's already spent, what, $25 billion, at least. I think that's a lowball number. [31:11] And it's not helping Americans here at home. [31:15] There's another question that was raised by your colleague, Senator Mazie Hirano. Let me play that [31:21] exchange. Did you order the review to support a potential decision to overturn the policy of [31:29] having women in combat roles? We are laser-focused on standards. The highest male standard for every [31:36] combat arms position should be the standard. And 10 years into this, we are reviewing it, [31:40] which is what the American people would expect. Will you make the study public? [31:46] Will you make that study? Yes or no? [31:48] We're doing the study for that very reason, to ensure that real science is applied to this [31:53] question and not social engineering like the previous administration. [31:58] I want to expand on that because he said earlier, Senator, Secretary Hegseth did, [32:03] he accused Democrats on the committee and the previous Defense Department of being focused on, [32:09] and I'm quoting him here, hype, social engineering, gender, race in ways we think, [32:18] he says, were unhealthy for the department. You served in the Reserve Forces for 23 years [32:23] before retiring at the rank of lieutenant colonel. What's your reaction of that, to that? [32:29] Well, Pete Hegseth is an incompetent fool. He is a misogynist, and he's been trying to get rid of [32:37] women's role in our military. He obviously must have lost out a promotion to a female service [32:43] member at some point and is, you know, on a personal vendetta. But bottom line, in the testimony, [32:49] he said, we are doing this to the highest male standard, as if there were only two standards in [32:54] the military. And in fact, the physical fitness standards are actually graduated based on age as [33:01] well. So a 40-year-old serviceman does not have to run the two miles as fast as an 18-year-old [33:10] serviceman. So it is also differentiated by age as well as by gender. And frankly, you know, [33:15] as someone who served in a combat arms branch, and I volunteered to serve in the first combat arms [33:20] branch that actually accepted women into combat roles, which is as a helicopter pilot, you know, [33:27] I know what the experience is. I know that our women who have met those standards have met the [33:33] standards. They're doing their jobs. They are actually out there participating and taking care [33:39] of the business at hand. And frankly, our nation's military could not go to war without its female [33:44] service members. And yet, Pete Hegseth is on this personal vendetta. In fact, he's fired every female [33:50] four-star general and tried to stop the additional promotion of two African-American women generals [33:57] from getting additional stars. And that's why, you know, the former army chief of staff quit. [34:04] Let me ask you finally, some House Democrats voiced frustration after yesterday's hearing that [34:09] they didn't get the answers they were looking for from the secretary. Some even accused Hegseth of [34:13] lying. Your colleague, Senator Blumenthal, just said that he was surprised by the, quote, [34:18] willful blindness and self-delusion coming out of that room. So if that is a majority opinion among [34:25] Democrats and maybe even a Republican or two, is there anything you can do about this? Is there [34:32] any real power in oversight, Senator? Well, this is where we take it to the American people who have [34:39] the ultimate oversight, right? The American people can see that these folks are lying. Donald Trump said [34:43] he's winning the war. Pete Hegseth all day today for the last three hours is talking about how well he's [34:47] doing. He's not doing well. He's incompetent. Our military men and women, they're doing their jobs [34:52] well. They always have been. They're the highly trained, highly proficient professionals. But [34:56] unfortunately, their civilian leadership in Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump are incompetent. They're [35:02] burning billions of taxpayer dollars. Americans are not better off. The Strait of Hormuz is now mined. [35:07] We've taught Iran that they can charge a million dollars a ship to go through the Strait of Hormuz. [35:12] Trump's illegal war of choice is forcing prices up and putting Americans in needless dangers. And it's already [35:17] cost 13 service members their lives and injured hundreds more. That's not winning a war. And [35:23] frankly, they continue to hide their incompetence behind the valor of our troops. You know, this is [35:29] what this is all about. And he continues to hype this up. And they say whatever they want. But we [35:33] know we have a liar for a president and obviously a liar for a secretary of defense as well. [35:38] He also suggested that the reason the American people don't support this war is because of the [35:44] misinformation that Democrats are putting out there. Senator Tammy Duckworth, [35:48] I really appreciate you coming out and taking the time to talk to us. Thank you. [35:54] Pete Hegseth was back on Capitol Hill today facing lawmakers who pressed him on the deeply unpopular [36:00] war with Iran. Here's Hegseth when he was asked about the alarming reporting that the U.S. military [36:06] has depleted a significant amount of munitions in just the first 60 days of war. [36:11] How many years to replenish? That's the question. I think that's exactly the right question to [36:17] Senator, because the time frame we were existing under was unacceptable. Okay, well, [36:22] tell me. And what this budget does, I mean, months and years. Fast. Years. I mean, [36:25] we're building new plants in real time. So just to replace what we have expended. [36:30] I said months. And then you said years. It depends on the weapons system. But two to three, [36:36] four X of what we have today. So yes, we're dealing with a reality under the previous administration of [36:40] what they sent to Ukraine and what they allocated elsewhere. Okay, I got it. So we fired years [36:44] rapidly doing it quickly. Worth of munitions. And it is clear that we're, these are being expended [36:52] to try to achieve some objectives. That was the plan. But Mr. Secretary, this war is stuck. [37:05] Hold an inconvenient truce there presented to Pete Hegseth by Senator Mark Kelly. Joining our coverage [37:10] is Margaret Donovan. She served as a captain in the Army, serving in the 101st Airborne Division. [37:16] Later in this Special Forces Group, she was captain in the JAG Corps and is the former assistant U.S. [37:21] attorney for the District of Connecticut. She's now a visiting lecturer at Yale Law. Miles is still [37:26] here. Miles, that's intimidating. I'm sorry to make you appear. [37:28] I'll just tap out. I was like, and Miles. No, we love you, Miles. We love you. We love you. I mean, [37:41] what is your sense of how revelatory Hegseth's two days were on Capitol Hill? [37:49] Well, for example, the clip that we just saw, I'm so grateful to Senator Kelly for asking those [37:54] questions, because that has been sort of an untold story of this, is that this is a discretionary war, [38:00] which means that everything that we are doing in this war, every munition that we are expending [38:04] are ones that we could have and should have been stockpiling. And I can just give you some numbers. [38:09] You know, there are reports that we have lost 24 MQ-9 Reaper drones in this war. That's about 10% [38:14] of the U.S. fleet. The Gulf states, not the U.S., but the Gulf states have expended, I think, [38:18] 2,000 Patriot interceptors. Those are basically air defense systems that the U.S. produces. [38:25] The annual production rate of those is about 600 a year globally. So if we have expended 2,000 since [38:32] February 28th, that tells you where those stockpiles are. And they exist for a reason. [38:36] There is a very real regional threat, the Indo-Pacific threat that the Gulf states and the [38:39] United States want to make sure that they are prepared for. And so that is one of the costs. [38:44] We can talk all day about how successful we are militarily, and that's great. But understand that [38:49] there are necessary costs to being militarily successful. And those costs are, we are down [38:55] on stockpiles that are very important to national defense. And to the Secretary's comments that we, [38:59] the clip that we just played, we actually, this administration declined to send things like [39:05] precision-guided bomb units to Ukraine, saying that we didn't have enough in our own stockpiles. [39:10] And that was before we started a war with Iran. So there are a lot of inconsistencies here. [39:15] And if the purpose of these hearings is to determine, should we keep funding the Department [39:22] of Defense? Is our money being used wisely? Those are questions that Secretary Hegseth really should [39:27] have answered more directly and honestly. You know, I think you can probably share this opinion. [39:34] I don't know if Pete Hegseth knows the answers to those things. I don't think he knows much of [39:37] substance at all about the military. He's very big on culture wars and images. But I don't think he [39:42] actually has any, like, long-term strategic vision or even deep knowledge of how the military operates. [39:48] I mean, the Atlantic reporting suggests J.D. Vance doesn't think he does either. [39:54] That would be consistent, I think, with most people's impressions. And like, look, he was a, [39:58] you know, a largely unqualified candidate for this, which itself isn't fatal. You can surround yourself [40:05] with experienced people. But we also see him firing very experienced people who could help him in times [40:12] when he maybe needs to lean on people with more experience than he does. [40:16] What is the sort of geopolitical? I mean, these aren't state secrets. I mean, this was a televised [40:22] hearing. China could see it. Russia could see it. What are the geopolitical implications of it being [40:29] known the world over that America is low on bombs? [40:31] Well, it's certainly not good. And so I understand that he may not want to admit that. But the fact [40:37] of the matter is he is there asking for Congress for money to fund the next fiscal year and to fund [40:44] the war. He's asking for a trillion-dollar budget. And so you have to be frank and transparent. [40:48] He's under oath in these hearings with what the actual state of our national security is. [40:54] And, you know, this is why you have to be really careful about going to war, right? Because these are [41:00] the costs that you incur, that a country incurs when it goes to war, you're going to have [41:04] vulnerabilities necessarily when you expend some of your most important strengths. And there was [41:09] reporting, and I don't know if I didn't watch the entire hearing today, I don't know if it was asked [41:13] about, but at the end of the last fiscal year, he was spending something like millions on lobster towel [41:18] and ribeye and all kinds of things to basically run out the clock and burn the budget before the fiscal [41:22] year ended. So I hope he answers those questions as well, is why wasn't that put towards something [41:27] more important, more useful, something that could stabilize us in a very destabilizing state? [41:33] You know, Miles, Trump is obsessed with men like Mark Milley. He was obsessed with the coverage, [41:44] I think, in The Atlantic and in Bob Woodward's book, and the criticism from men like Mark Milley and [41:53] former chief of staff, John Kelly, and Secretary Mattis, who described him as, quote, dictatorial to [42:02] the core. And then I think General Kelly went on to say he meant, quote, every technical definition [42:07] of a dictator. And I used to think he was stung by that criticism because it made him look bad. [42:15] He wasn't mad that they described him as a dictator. He just wanted somebody who would let him play [42:19] dictator as president. And I've spent months trying to understand why Pete Hegseth, who is actually [42:28] more ludicrous in the flesh than Colin Jost is on SNL, why he's still there when they've thrown, [42:35] Kristi Noem is laying under the bus next to Pam Bondi, next to the labor lady whose husband was [42:40] banned from the building. Why is Hegseth still there? You know, the war has destroyed his political [42:45] coalition. He's still there because he lets Trump be the dictator he's always wanted to be. [42:50] Yes. He's still there because from him, Donald Trump does not get resistance. He gets praise and [42:58] flattery. And he gets from Pete Hegseth compliance. That's what he gets. That's what he wants. But we're [43:05] also seeing, like the world is a petri dish, Nicole, the consequences of that experiment. Because when [43:12] there were people willing to push back against the president, people with four stars on their shoulders [43:17] who said, I've been in war, you don't want to start one here. It's bad. Well, now we know what that looks [43:23] like. I mean, just think about the position Donald Trump has put us in. Even if we were winning in [43:28] Iran, regardless of what's going on in Iran, geo-strategically, we are now all in on this one [43:36] theater, the biggest military buildup in the Middle East since our 2003 invasion of Iraq. And every [43:44] single missile we're firing at Tehran is one that can't be fired back at Beijing or Moscow if another [43:51] conflict breaks open. That's something that John Kelly or Jim Mattis would have said. If you're going [43:56] to go all in here, it puts us at grave risk. If another conflict opens up, it stretches us thin. [44:02] But that's not the only thing, because in doing this, Nicole, we've also burned our alliances. [44:08] That's part of the calculus. You've got to understand here, if another crisis erupts, [44:13] if it's China trying to take Taiwan, if it's the takeover of a country that we're not seeing coming, [44:19] if it's Moscow going into Eastern Europe, here's the thing. We've burned our allies. Spain shut us out [44:25] of its bases because of this. Overflight in different countries has been restricted. The conditions you [44:32] would want with a closeness to our allies are not going to be there. These are really, [44:37] really big consequences that any experienced military figure would have seen coming by taking [44:42] on this conflict. It's amazing that that is the state of affairs with our allies.