Tammy Duckworth EXPOSES Hegseth in Brutal Senate Clash!

[0:00] Can you name the importance of at least one of the nations in ASEAN and what type of agreement [0:07] we have with at least one of those nations? [0:09] And how many nations are in ASEAN, by the way? [0:11] I couldn't tell you the exact amount of nations in that. [0:14] But I know we have allies in South Korea, in Japan, and in AUKUS with Australia, trying [0:19] to work on submarines with them, and data transfers with them, and we have allies across. [0:25] None of those three countries that you've mentioned are in ASEAN. [0:27] I suggest you do a little homework before you prepare for these types of negotiations. [0:33] Listen. [0:35] Mr. Hexell, we ask our troops to go into harm's way all the time. [0:44] We ask them to go into harm's way. [0:46] And this behind me is a copy of the Soldiers' Creed, a copy that usually hangs over my desk [0:51] here in the Senate. [0:52] And you should be familiar with it. [0:53] It's the same copy that hung over my desk at Walter Reed every single day that I woke up [0:57] and fought my way back because I wanted to go back and serve next to my buddies who'd [1:01] saved my life. [1:03] This same copy, these words, I repeat it over and over and over again. [1:09] And let me read out two things to you, two sentences. [1:12] I will always place the mission first, and I am disciplined physically and mentally tough, [1:18] trained and proficient in my warrior task. [1:21] Mr. Hexeth, our troops follow these words every single day. [1:24] They man up, and they pack their rucksacks, and they go to war. [1:28] And they deserve a leader who can lead them, not a leader who wants to lower the standards [1:33] for himself of raising the standards. [1:35] It starts with a basic question. [1:37] Not a trick. [1:37] Not a trap. [1:38] How many nations are in ASEAN, simple, foundational, essential? [1:42] And then, hesitation. [1:44] Not knowing is one thing, guessing is another. [1:48] Naming the wrong countries, that's different. [1:51] Because this isn't a classroom, this isn't a quiz, this is a confirmation hearing for [1:55] the person who wants to run the most powerful military on earth. [1:59] And sitting across the table is someone who already knows the answer. [2:03] And more importantly, knows what that answer reveals. [2:08] Because this moment, it's not about ASEAN. [2:11] It's about readiness. [2:13] It's about competence. [2:14] And by the time it's over, the real question isn't what he got wrong. [2:19] It's how much else he doesn't know. [2:21] Um, Mr. Hexhead, this hearing is about whether you are qualified to be Secretary of Defense. [2:27] And one of the qualifications to answer my colleague's question is to actually win the [2:31] votes of every member of this committee, and to be confirmed by the United States Senate. [2:35] And you need to convince us that you're worthy of that vote. [2:38] Because the people of the state of Illinois voted for me to be their senator so that I [2:42] could cast that vote when it comes to picking who is going to be the next Secretary of Defense. [2:47] This hearing now seems to be a hearing about whether or not women are qualified to serve [2:51] in combat, and not about whether or not you are qualified to be Secretary of Defense. [2:56] And let me just say that the American people need a SecDef who's ready to lead on day one. [3:01] You are not that person. [3:02] Our adversaries watch closely during times of transition. [3:06] And any sense that the Department of Defense that keeps us safe is being steered by someone [3:10] who is wholly unprepared for the job puts America at risk. [3:13] And I am not willing to do that. [3:16] With that in mind, Mr. Hexhead, I want you to try to explain to the American people, this [3:19] committee who have to vote for you, and to our troops who are deployed around the world, [3:24] why you are qualified to lead the Department of Defense. [3:27] We already know that you've only led the largest of 200-person organization. [3:32] We already know that you so badly mangled a budget that after you left, they had to bring [3:37] in a forensic accountant to figure out what went wrong. [3:41] And that the largest budget you ever managed was about $18 billion. [3:45] You know, that is about 51,560 times fewer, lower than the Department of Defense budget [3:53] of $825 billion. [3:55] $16 million is 51,568 times smaller than the defense budget. [4:03] Please describe to me, Mr. Hexhead, you talk about DOD passing an audit. [4:09] Please describe to me a time or an organization that you led underwent an audit. [4:15] Because you say you're going to hire smarter people than you to run this audit. [4:19] I'm not asking you to be an accountant. [4:20] I want you to be able to tell me what kind of guidance will be given to those employees, [4:26] what will happen whether or not you pass that audit. [4:29] Have you led an audit of any organization, yes or no? [4:32] I don't want a long answer. [4:33] Yes or no. [4:34] Yes or no? [4:35] Did you lead an audit? [4:36] Yes or no? [4:37] Did you lead an audit? [4:38] Yes or no? [4:39] Yes or no? [4:40] Yes or no, did you lead an audit? [4:41] Yes or no, did you lead an audit? [4:42] Yes or no? [4:43] Yes or no, did you lead an audit? [4:45] Yes or no? [4:46] Can't answer this question? [4:47] Yes or no, did you lead an audit? [4:50] Yes or no? [4:51] Do you not know this answer? [4:52] Senator, every part of my leadership of these organizations has been misrepresented from [4:56] top to bottom? [4:57] Yes or no? [4:58] I will take that as a no. [4:59] What were the findings? [5:00] Though there were no findings because you've never led an audit. [5:01] What guidance did you give the auditors? [5:03] None, because you've never led an audit. [5:06] Nobody expects you to be an accountant, Mr. Hextheth. [5:08] What we expect is for you to understand [5:10] the complexity of this Pentagon budget process [5:13] that is absolutely necessary to outfit our warfighters. [5:17] Look, the Secretary of Defense is required [5:19] to make quick decisions every single day [5:22] with high-level information that's being provided for them. [5:25] A Secretary of Defense has to have breadth and depth [5:28] of knowledge. [5:28] Right now, I am concerned that you have neither. [5:31] Mr. Hextheth, what is the highest level [5:34] of international negotiations that you have engaged in, [5:36] that you have led in? [5:37] Because the Secretary of Defense does lead [5:39] international security negotiations. [5:41] There are three main ones that the Secretary of Defense leads [5:43] and signs. [5:44] Can you name at least one of them? [5:47] Could you repeat the question, Senator? [5:48] Sure. [5:49] What is the highest level of international security [5:51] agreement that you have led, and can you name some [5:56] that the Secretary of Defense would lead? [5:57] There are three main ones. [5:59] Do you know? [6:00] I have not been involved in international security [6:02] arrangements, because I have not been in government other [6:04] than serving in the military. [6:05] So my job has been to lead men and women in combat. [6:08] No. [6:08] Can you name one of the three main ones [6:09] that the Secretary of Defense signs? [6:11] You're talking about defense arrangements. [6:11] I mean, NATO might be one that you're referring to. [6:15] Status of Forces Agreement would be one of them. [6:17] Status of Forces Agreement. [6:19] I've been a part of teaching about status of forces [6:22] agreements inside Afghanistan. [6:22] But you don't remember to mention it? [6:25] You're not qualified, Mr. Hexth. [6:27] You're not qualified. [6:28] You talk about repairing our defense industrial complex. [6:31] You're not qualified to that. [6:34] You could do acquisition and cross-servicing agreements, which [6:35] essentially are security agreements. [6:37] You can't even mention that. [6:38] Watch the structure, because nothing here is random. [6:41] It feels spontaneous. [6:42] It feels heated. [6:43] But it's controlled, deliberate, step by step. [6:47] First, control the frame. [6:49] Before any real questioning begins, Tammy Duckworth [6:51] resets the entire room. [6:53] She says it directly. [6:54] This hearing is not about distractions, not about side debates. [6:58] It is about one thing, qualification. [7:01] That matters more than anything else, because once the frame is set, [7:04] every answer is judged against it, and every failure becomes clearer. [7:08] Second, build the case before asking the question. [7:11] She doesn't jump in aggressively. [7:13] She lays out facts, a 200-person organization, budget mismanagement, a forensic accountant [7:19] brought in after, then the number, 16 million, and then another number, 825 billion. [7:28] That's the Department of Defense. [7:30] Let that gap sink in. [7:32] Not slightly bigger, not moderately larger. [7:34] 51,000 times larger. [7:37] That's not a step up. [7:38] That's a different universe. [7:40] And she doesn't need to say it. [7:41] The math says it for her. [7:42] Third, the audit question, simple, direct. [7:44] Have you ever led an audit, yes or no? [7:46] No wiggle room, no interpretation, just clarity. [7:49] And this is where everything begins to crack. [7:52] Pete Hegseth doesn't answer. [7:53] He circles. [7:54] He reframes. [7:55] He talks about responsibility. [7:57] But he avoids the core. [7:58] So she asks again, same question, yes or no? [8:02] Again, no answer. [8:04] Now comes the moment. [8:05] Calm, controlled. [8:07] I will take that as a no. [8:09] That line lands hard because it ends the debate. [8:11] It removes ambiguity. [8:13] It tells everyone watching, he didn't answer. [8:16] And the answer is no. [8:18] No shouting, no theatrics, just conclusion. [8:22] And from that point forward, the tone changes. [8:25] Fourth, escalation. [8:27] Now she moves to something bigger, international security agreements. [8:31] This is not theory. [8:32] This is the job. [8:33] The Secretary of Defense negotiates with allies, signs agreements, shapes global security. [8:39] So she asks, name one, just one, not all, just one. [8:44] He hesitates, asks her to repeat. [8:46] That hesitation matters. [8:48] Because in real negotiations, there are no second chances to hear the question. [8:52] Then a guess, NATO, a broad alliance, relevant, but not precise. [8:58] Not what she asked. [8:59] And she doesn't correct immediately. [9:01] She waits. [9:02] Silence again. [9:03] Pressure builds. [9:04] Eventually, he reaches for something closer. [9:07] Status of forces agreement. [9:09] But it comes late, after hesitation, after uncertainty, and timing matters. [9:15] Because knowing something late is not the same as knowing it when it counts. [9:19] Fifth, return to ASEAN. [9:21] Now the earlier clip makes sense. [9:24] This wasn't random. [9:25] It was set up. [9:26] A test of basic regional understanding. [9:29] And he failed it. [9:30] Not partially. [9:31] Completely. [9:32] Not ASEAN. [9:33] Japan. [9:33] Not ASEAN. [9:35] Australia. [9:36] Not ASEAN. [9:37] Three answers. [9:38] Three misses. [9:39] And when she says, none of those countries are in ASEAN, that's not just correction. [9:43] That's exposure. [9:44] Because this isn't advanced strategy. [9:46] This is baseline knowledge. [9:48] The kind expected before day one. [9:50] Sixth, shift from knowledge to stakes. [9:53] Now the tone changes again. [9:55] Facts are done. [9:56] Now comes meaning. [9:57] She brings in the soldier's creed. [9:59] Not as decoration. [10:00] As proof. [10:01] Because Tammy Duckworth isn't just a senator. [10:04] She's a combat veteran. [10:06] She lost both legs in Iraq. [10:08] She lived this. [10:09] So when she reads, I will always place the mission first. [10:14] Those aren't just words. [10:15] That's lived experience. [10:16] And now she draws the line. [10:18] Our troops meet the standard every day. [10:20] In combat. [10:21] Under pressure. [10:22] With lives on the line. [10:23] So why should the standard be lowered for leadership? [10:27] That's the question she's really asking. [10:29] Not directly, but clearly. [10:31] The final verdict. [10:32] The final verdict. [10:33] You are not qualified. [10:34] No buildup. [10:35] No hesitation. [10:36] No ambiguity. [10:37] Just a conclusion. [10:38] And here's why it lands so hard. [10:40] Because she didn't start there. [10:42] She built to it. [10:43] Step by step. [10:43] Question by question. [10:45] Failure by failure. [10:46] So by the time she says it, it doesn't feel like an opinion. [10:49] It feels like the only possible outcome. [10:51] And that's the strategy. [10:53] Not to argue. [10:54] Not to debate. [10:55] To demonstrate. [10:56] Eighth. [10:56] The deeper layer. [10:58] Because this isn't just about one hearing. [11:00] It's about perception. [11:01] Supporters will say this was political. [11:04] A setup. [11:04] An attack. [11:05] Critics will say this was necessary. [11:08] A test. [11:08] A reality check. [11:10] And both sides will walk away unmoved. [11:13] But that's not the point of hearings like this. [11:15] The real audience is everyone watching later. [11:18] Clips. [11:18] Highlights. [11:19] Moments like ASEAN. [11:20] Moments like I will take that as a no. [11:23] Those become the story. [11:25] Not the full transcript. [11:26] Not the full context. [11:27] Just the defining moments. [11:29] And those moments shape perception. [11:31] Ninth. [11:32] The bigger question. [11:33] What does it actually take to lead the Department of Defense? [11:37] Is it vision? [11:38] Experience? [11:39] Instinct? [11:40] Or is it something simpler? [11:41] Preparation. [11:42] Knowing the basics. [11:44] Understanding the landscape. [11:46] Being ready. [11:48] Before you walk in. [11:49] Because once you're in, there are no retries. [11:52] No do-overs. [11:53] No second chances to answer correctly. [11:56] And that's what this hearing exposed. [11:58] Not just what was said, but what wasn't known. [12:01] And that's the part that lingers. [12:02] Because in the end, this isn't just about one nominee. [12:05] It's about the standard. [12:07] Who sets it? [12:08] Who meets it? [12:08] And what happens when someone doesn't? [12:11] That's when the system is supposed to respond. [12:14] Not emotionally. [12:15] Not politically. [12:16] Procedurally. [12:17] Because confirmation hearings are not ceremonies. [12:19] They are filters. [12:21] Designed to catch exactly this moment. [12:23] A gap. [12:24] A hesitation. [12:25] A failure under pressure. [12:27] And then ask, is this acceptable? [12:29] Is this manageable? [12:31] Or is this disqualifying? [12:33] Because once that person is confirmed, the questions don't get easier. [12:37] They get harder. [12:38] Faster. [12:38] Higher stakes. [12:40] Less room for error. [12:41] No one pauses a battlefield decision to repeat the question. [12:44] No one slows down a negotiation because the answer isn't ready. [12:48] And no one explains the basics. [12:50] When the expectation is that you already know them. [12:53] That's the risk. [12:54] Not the moment itself. [12:56] But what the moment represents. [12:58] Because if you struggle here in a controlled room with time, with preparation, what happens out there [13:04] when intelligence is incomplete? [13:06] When allies are waiting? [13:07] When adversaries are watching? [13:09] That's the real test. [13:10] And that's what hearings try to simulate. [13:12] A glimpse. [13:13] A preview. [13:14] A controlled version of uncontrolled reality. [13:18] Now zoom out. [13:19] Because this isn't just about one exchange. [13:22] It's about standards over time. [13:25] What used to be required versus what is now acceptable. [13:29] Experience used to be non-negotiable. [13:31] Preparation used to be assumed. [13:33] Now it's debated. [13:35] Redefined. [13:36] Sometimes ignored. [13:37] And every time the line moves, it rarely moves back. [13:41] That's how institutions change. [13:44] Not in one decision, but in a series of small allowances. [13:47] One exception. [13:48] Then another. [13:49] Until the exception becomes the expectation. [13:52] And the expectation becomes the new normal. [13:54] That's the quiet shift happening underneath moments like this. [13:58] Not loud. [13:58] Not obvious. [14:00] But real. [14:01] Because when a nominee struggles with foundational knowledge, [14:04] the question isn't just about that nominee. [14:06] It's about the process that brought them there. [14:09] Who vetted them? [14:10] Who approved them? [14:11] Who decided this was enough? [14:13] And more importantly, who is willing to say it isn't? [14:16] That's the pressure on the committee. [14:18] Not just to ask questions, but to draw a line. [14:21] Clearly. [14:22] Publicly. [14:23] On the record. [14:24] Because once that vote is cast, it doesn't disappear. [14:28] It follows. [14:28] Through decisions. [14:29] Through outcomes. [14:30] Through consequences. [14:31] And if something goes wrong later, people don't just ask what happened. [14:35] They ask who allowed it. [14:37] That's why moments like this matter more than they seem. [14:39] They're not just exchanges. [14:41] They're signals. [14:42] Signals about readiness. [14:44] Signals about standards. [14:46] Signals about accountability. [14:47] And signals travel. [14:49] They reach allies. [14:50] They reach adversaries. [14:51] They shape perception far beyond that room. [14:54] Because leadership at that level is not just about what you do. [14:58] It's about what others believe you can do. [15:00] Confidence matters. [15:01] Credibility matters. [15:02] And once doubt enters the equation, it doesn't leave easily. [15:06] So when someone doesn't meet the standard, the system faces a choice. [15:11] Adjust the standard. [15:12] Or uphold it. [15:13] And that choice defines everything that comes next. [15:17] Because once that decision is made, it doesn't stay contained. [15:20] It spreads. [15:21] Across agencies. [15:22] Across appointments. [15:24] Across expectations. [15:25] Standards at the top don't just sit there. [15:28] They cascade downward. [15:29] If the bar is lowered once, others notice. [15:32] Future nominees notice. [15:34] Advisors notice. [15:36] Even the people doing the vetting notice. [15:38] And slowly, the question shifts from, [15:42] are you ready? [15:43] To will this be enough? [15:44] That's the long-term consequence. [15:46] Not one hearing. [15:47] Not one vote. [15:48] But the signal it sends. [15:50] Because institutions don't weaken overnight. [15:53] They erode quietly, incrementally, decision by decision. [15:58] And every time the system chooses convenience over competence, it writes a precedent. [16:02] A new baseline. [16:03] One that becomes harder to reverse the next time. [16:06] So this moment, this exchange, it's not just a snapshot. [16:10] It's a marker. [16:11] A point in time where the line was tested. [16:14] And now, everyone is watching to see where that line is finally drawn. [16:18] So this is not clear. [16:20] We hear from you from the outside. [16:20] So, please... [16:21] Thank you, Ryan. [16:21] Thank you, Ryan. [16:22] Thank you, Ryan. [16:23] I appreciate it. [16:24] Hello, Ryan. [16:25] Thank you. [16:26] Thank you, Ryan. [16:26] Thank you, Ryan. [16:27] Thank you, Ryan. [16:27] Thank you, Ryan. [16:27] All right. [16:28] And if we've got this guy in the middle of this conference conference