🚨GOP Reps Turn Against Military Officials at Public Hearing!!

For $299, I'll bring you a pizza with sushi. Mmm, lecher.

“And for $199, I'll give you a little bit of ice cream.”

For all the news, you'll always have it.

Pretty good? Then try the snack time-sushi box. $225 for $299. Or mochi sandwich ice. $899 for $199.

That's good for everything for all the price. Now in your filial. Alrighty, what is filial? Even Republicans are living Republican Congress members are turning against Donald Trump, Donald Trump's top military officials, and Donald Trump's defense department in congressional hearings

live on TV before the entire world. I want to show you what went down at the latest congressional hearing. This was before the Armed Services Committee where Republican Congress members joined with Democratic Congress members on a fairly bipartisan basis to call out the Trump regime's attack on our military.

And these Congress members were not holding back in their questions to these top military officials, including the Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, as well as the new Army Chief of Staff, who replaced the very popular Army Chief of Staff Randy George, who was pushed out and fired by Pete Heggsett. So let me show you what went down when Republican Congress member Don Bacon was cross-examining

Driscoll and the other top military officials there, including the Army Chief of Staff and other top Army officials who were at this hearing, about the decision by Heggsett and the Defense Department to withdraw about 4,000 troops that were being deployed to Poland,

which obviously is critical given its proximity to Ukraine and Russia, and given the fact

that Poland is a model ally and Donald Trump and Heggsett are punishing Poland the same way they were punishing Germany and attacking NATO. Watch Republican Congress member Don Bacon's questioning of these top military officials from the Trump regime. Let's play it.

When you've been here, I know this wasn't your decision, this was the Secretary of Defense's decision. I got to tell you, it was reprehensible, it's an embarrassment to our country. How we just, what we just did to Poland, in my view, so let's, I don't you said we had

“a coordination with NATO or you come to answer it, the question, the real question is why?”

Why have we pulled two armor brigades out of Eastern Europe? Yes, sure, I'm not in the, on the policy side here, I'm, you're the Chief of Staff of the Army, there's, there's no good explanation why we just removed two armored brigades from Eastern Europe. There's got to be some explanation.

Oh, sure, I, I think as they reviewed the four structure, the conclusion was that we could, we could repack one of the brigades that are in the rotation, one brigade, one brigade that send the rotation pull that we send over to Europe. There's still another brigade there, there's still a division headquarters that's in rotation there.

We still have fifth core that is over there as well.

But we, we pulled the brigade out of Romania, never pulled the brigade out of Poland.

Is there a plan to replace that brigade of Poland? You would have to ask the co-comp commander, sir, on how he's going to maneuver the forces that he has. We still have a four structure that is permanent for structure that's in Europe, support in our allies through both exercises and continual presence on the, on the continent.

“I know there's made that represent 100% people as committee, but I think I represent the views”

of the vast majority. We disagree. Russia has invaded Ukraine if they give us any concessions to withdraw two armor brigades. Out of Europe, as are invading Ukraine, what concessions have they given us as we withdraw forces?

I can't answer that question. Why not this none? It's this is why it's so foolish. We're sending a terrible message to Russia and to our allies. Here's another question.

Do we know if Poland was notified by the Secretary? We don't know. Well, I already know the answer because they called me yesterday, they did not know. They were blindsided. These are some of our best allies.

They had no idea. They still don't know what the plan, they know the order was stopped. They don't know if this is just a suspension or permanent. We owe Poland, who and our Baltic friends, who are very vulnerable from this decision, a better explanation here.

In a rational way, we should be doing this before we actually make the decision. We should be coordinating with them. It's an embarrassment. I'm telling you, this is an embarrassment to our country, the way this is being handled. Now I happen to know the answer to this, well, I'm going to ask you just to be coordinated

with you, com. I can guarantee you, they did not say this is low risk. Can you verify that? Because I happen to know they say carries risk. So, no, there was a coordinated with you, com, but they did not say this is a low risk

Am I right? Sure.

“Those discussions that risked at me and from the co-manor back into, oh, it's not part”

of what the title 10 of the army does.

I was just hoping as the army chief, they would keep you put on a form, but I happen to know this, because I served in NATO, they did not say this is low risk. So in other words, the Secretary of Defense made this a decision over some objections of the U.C. commander. That's why I submit here.

Well, I just want to say this is a slap in the face to Poland, it's a slap in the face to our Baltic friends. I think it's a slap to the face in this committee, because we've put floors and restrictions on the Pentagon and further reductions in Europe because of what they did with Romania. They told this committee, over the leadership of this committee, that we were not going to,

there's no plans to remove this forgive from Romania, then a week later it was done. So then we responded in the NDAA to prevent this kind of behavior and it's happened again.

“I think this committee under the chairman, then right, you remember we got to hold the”

Secretary accountable for this decision, it's wrong.

Okay, my second question, I know the Baltic Security Chairman, Latvia and Estonia have

highmars, but they just have the lotters, they don't have the warheads or the weapons. What is the plan to fill that? Next I'll show you another Congress member, this time a Democratic Congress member, Congress member, Courtney's questions of these officials, let's play this clip. Secretary, just go on May 1st, 4,000 army soldiers of the second armored brigade combat team,

attended a color-casing ceremony, a send-off ahead of deployment to Eastern Europe that the army had announced last March. At the ceremony, Major General Tom Felty, who's the head of the first cavalry division, gave some very stirring remarks where he said, quote, "Make no mistake, our adversaries are paying attention when an armored brigade combat team deploys forward.

It sends a clear and unmistakable signal."

The ABCT is the embodiment of American ground combat power.

Given the fact that the administration just canceled this deployment a couple days ago, we have people actually already over there. Right now, I guess the question sort of begs itself, which is, is the opposite true. If our adversaries are paying attention, is the cancellation of a deployment of a brigade combat team, sending, again, the opposite signal in terms of our commitment.

To our allies in Eastern Europe. Sure, thank you for the question. We, the co-com commander, General Grinkowitz, you know, received the instructions on the force reduction. I've worked with him in close consultation of what that force unit would be.

And it was made the most sense for that brigade to not do its deployment and theater. We can continue to work closely with General Grinkowitz and his team on ensure that he has the right forces from us, the title 10, you know, headquarters here that man's trains, a quips and gets the units ready for their deployments. So, we work with him on what would be the unit that would not execute the mission.

“Well, again, I think General Felty is right that our adversaries are paying attention”

and that, I mean, I appreciate the answer, but frankly, I don't think that really rises to the moment in terms of just again the situation that exists in Europe. And frankly, it's not just our adversaries that are paying attention. It's our allies, Poland, which is apparently where the deployment was at least going to begin and originate, has an ally that's spending 4.8% of GDP in terms of their defense

budgets and all the other Baltic countries are up in that range as well. And given the fact that the administration also cancel or is pulling back 5,000 troops out of Germany, I'm sorry, I just think this is a horrible message that, again, adversaries and allies are paying attention to. I'm so excited to tell you that our sponsor Avocado Green mattress, their certified organic

mattresses are specifically designed to relieve pressure points, support your body of the way it needs and help you actually get the deep restorative sleep that you've been missing. Every mattress is made with a thoughtfully sourced materials and built with a real care, so you get incredibly sleep night after night. When I invest in something for my home, I want it to last.

That's what I love about Avocado. Their best-selling Green mattress is supportive and incredibly comfortable and feels intentionally made, not mass-produced. It's the kind of purchase that not only helps you sleep better, but also feels like a smart long-term investment.

Avocado products are crafted with real certified organic materials that provide comfort, breathability and durability, and because they're made to last, they're a better choice for both your home and the planet. Avocado products are made, not manufactured and thoughtfully crafted with real materials

Go to avocadogreenmatrous.com/minus to check out their mattress and furniture sale.

As Avocado Greenmatrous.com/minus, AvocadoGreenmatrous.com/minus, that's M-E-I-D-A-S. Now, in this next clip, I'm going to share if we want to show you that this was done on a fairly bipartisan basis in the Armed Services Committee because the decisions that are being made by these top military officials, specifically at the Defense Department and at the Oval Office level Donald Trump, JD Vance, Marco Rubio, Higgsith in that

level. It's so dangerous, it's so harmful to NATO, it's so harmful to our allies and even Republicans are speaking up. So you have the head of the committee, Congress member Rogers, you have this guy Austin Scott or a public and Congress member from Georgia, and then you have the Democratic-rank member

Congress member Smith, all three of them are in alignment here, calling out the Trump regime,

the Trump regime, military officials. Let me show you what went down here, let's play this clip.

“When was the second armored brigade rotation to Poland cancelled?”

Just a couple days ago, Congressman, okay, a couple of days ago and when were, so who made the decision to halt that? Sure, in consultation with the co-com commander, he received the direction to do the reductions, we looked at what would be the best choice. When did he receive that direction?

Sure, I'm not sure exactly the date that he received that this was all, you know, relatively recent, and we worked back and forth on what those recommendations would be and the order came down.

That's going to be wonderful.

Sure, I'm short on time, you say recent, when you say recent, you mean 10 days or... Yeah, it's probably been a lot within the last two weeks, yeah. Okay, within the last two weeks, the decision was made. So this has been a long plan, my understanding is advance elements for already overseas, is that correct?

That's correct, sir. And equipment was in transit. Yes, sir. Okay. When were you informed of the decision, just a couple days ago, whenever, well, within

that... That's two weeks, when does sir? Okay, whenever we work together with the co-com commander, again, in total 10. On a same. In Secretary of Justice, was your, were you informed that the exact same, uh, assuming you

informed at the same time? Yes, Carson. Okay. Well, you consulted about the decision prior to the decision being made, or was the decision

“made, and you told this is the decision, and we're going to stop this rotation?”

Sure. I had consultations with General Grinkovich on, you know, different elements that are in Europe, and what would be the most prudent one to stop. Okay. These conversations were all within the last two weeks.

That's correct, sir. Okay. All right. I support NATO, I will say this. I mean, obviously, there's a tremendous overlap between NATO and the European Union.

I'm very frustrated with the European Union, a lot of trade-related issues, and I've told our NATO partners in my office very directly, you know, you don't get to pretend your friends when you pass an Ontario trade barriers through the European Union that damaged

“industry in the United States, like the timber industry with what they've done with the European”

Union deforestation regulation. So I understand this tough to balance all of these things, but I want to get to, I mean, my primary concern, I'm not worried about the 5,000 troops coming out of Germany. I mean, they had been plushed up, there'd been, there'd been, there'd been pulled back. But it seems to me that when there's been a long plan, rotation, there's a nine-month rotation,

how long have we been doing these rotations? They've done on the annual -- Yeah, we've been doing it for a couple of years now, sir, since the -- it's such a division. But we also continuously do planning on what the force elements will be utilized by the co-commoners based off the needs that they present.

But our -- the advanced -- we're already there. The equipment was already on the way before the decision to cancel was made, correct?

The decision to withdraw troops follows a comprehensive, multi-layered process that incorporates

“perspectives from key leaders in U.S. military in Europe and across the chain of commands,”

said the acting Pentagon Secretary Joel Valdez. This is not an unexpected last-minute decision. I don't -- I don't see how that statement can be true. Congressman, I would say outside of the broader specifics that General Linivis talking about. We are constantly in contact with OSW and the command commanders.

We're having planning, and this is not meant to hide the ball. This is to say this type of conversation is going on throughout the year.

Every single year in the Army is always ready to move people in things based off combat

and commander in Secretary of Warp Preferences. And so this is not that unusual. Secretary, I respect you. These are major decisions that appear to many of the members of this committee to be last-minute decisions.

Gentlemen, it's time's expired and the gentleman is correct. We have been very focused on this committee about forced posture and you comment particular, not being disturbed, particularly without what statute requires is consultation with us. And we didn't get that.

So we don't know what's going on here, but I just tell you, we're not happy with what's being talked about. Particularly since there's been no statutory consultation with us. I just-- sorry, just-- thank you, members, Rick and I emphasize that point, and I yielded my question time.

But the one thing I really want, and we talked about this yesterday, general, why? Okay, I came get an answer to that question. All right, we had a brigade combat team ready to go to Poland, decided not to, and the only answer I've got is, well, that's what they told us to do. Okay, why?

I mean, what is the strategy behind this? And it is a pretty dramatic decision to let the last-minute pull a team that you're trying to send over there. If there's some strategy behind it, then you guys ought to know, and you ought to be able to communicate it to us.

And now I want to share with you as well. You have a Democratic Congress member, Crow. Here he was cross-examining Driscoll, and this was a very important moment as well.

“Let's remember that Congress member, Crow, special forces, Army Ranger, saw very, very”

serious combat tours, knows a lot about the Army, obviously, given his positions in the past, given that he's a veteran, given that he's served.

Let me show you, as he raises, what I think is a very critical issue, the fact that

the Trump regime has gutted the teams that deal with mitigating civilian casualties and war, especially as the Trump regime has engaged in all of these war crimes. Let me share with you what went down. Let's play it. We're both combat veterans, both served honorably in the Army, and during the course of

my three combat tours, I had the privilege of serving at the so-called tip of the spheres. Some of our most elite combat units, 82nd Airborne Division, 75th Ranger Regiment, served with the Joint Special Operations Command and Afghanistan. And I bristle at this notion coming from the Department of Defense from Secretary

Heggset that we somehow lack leaveality. There's something wrong with our culture, because the men women who I served with were committed to the mission and fought very hard. And we're very lethal when it came for the time for that. But over the course of those tours, what became very obvious to me is that what we did

lack was a full understanding about how to win the support of local populations, how to lay the groundwork for support for what we were trying to do. We were very good with missions, very great with tactics and accomplishing every mission.

But we ultimately lost the support of the people in our Afghan Afghanistan, who we were there

to serve and to help liberate. So I created a bipartisan law in 2023 to create a civilian protection center of excellence to assemble the best practices to understand how we protect civilians. We make that a priority for our military. That CPCOE passed and a bipartisan basis years ago.

It was nestled in the Army where it exists. I'm very concerned by a recent DOD IG report that says, quote, "In February 2025, the acting under Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Army each developed proposals for the sectF to consider and approve options to eliminate or significantly reduce the CPCOE."

How do you square that with law in the bipartisan intent of this committee, including many

“fellow combat veterans, that we make this a priority for our military?”

Congressman, I just want to start off with the statement that, as somebody that also deployed to theater about the time you're talking about, civilian casualties, no one should wish for those and they create all sorts of beyond just the morality issues.

And so we in the Department of War and the Army are perfectly aligned that we want to minimize those in every instance, specifically what you're referencing, Congressman. As far as I recall, and I will follow up with your offices, if this is incorrect, our intent was simply to move it from the Army to DOW. I don't think we had any intention to shrink it.

“There was an instance about a month and a half ago where I believe I spoke with your office”

where in doing some -- the United States Army had never matched up.

It's people and it's jobs and so we spent about 10 months going through an exercise to try to save the American taxpayer to about $2 billion a year. And what we had found out in that process is we had never accurately coded the positions for the center so that when we went through that exercise, it looked as if we were getting rid of it.

I believe after we spoke with your office, we immediately remedied it. I -- we need to follow up. I know our offices have been talking, but things are not squaring here, right? This DODIG report is pretty clear.

There are proposals to eliminate CPCOE, which is different from a coding shift or an accounting

“shift of personnel and resources, because the report went on and it said, "If I found”

that lost personnel and leadership at COE is hindering full DOD compliance with its civilian casualties in harm policy, a policy required by federal law, the office of the Secretary of War and DOW components lack many of the personnel and tools designed to execute the statutory purpose." So some things not happening, it is not conducting its statutory role in mission, it's losing

personnel, it's losing resources, it's being shifted around this needs to be fixed. Because this is law. If you don't like the law, we can talk about that. What needs to be changed, but it has to be changed here. So long as it is law, it needs to be carried out.

>> Tell you a great congressman, we'll follow up with your office and just to become behalf of the Army, the intent is to follow all statutory intent and the laws, and so we'll make sure that we're in compliance. >> Thank you, Secretary. >> Now you had Don Bacon, Republican Congress member posting the following.

I just want to say that what the Trump regime is doing, that this is a slap in the face to Poland, it's a slap in the face to our Baltic friends, it's a slap in the face to this committee. And then in response, the Republican press secretary at the Defense Department, Sean Parnell posted the decision to withdraw troops, follows a comprehensive, multi-layered process, and

incorporates perspectives from key leaders in U-com, European Command, and across the chain of command. This was not an unexpected last minute decision, and it would be a false report, it would

“be false, to report, and as such, the truth is what the political headline says.”

No idea it was coming, Pentagon officials stunned by heggsets decision on troops in Poland. It wasn't clear why the Defense Secretary issued the order, not to send troops on a routine mission to a country. The administration refers to as a model ally to which Republican Congress member, Don Bacon writes.

This is Baloney, for starters, Poland was not notified, senior leaders contacted me yesterday saying they were blindsided, and I've learned that U-com did not say there was minimal risk by canceling the deployment. This was a foolish and embarrassing course of events, but it was also a course of events that you must ask yourself, who is this benefiting, it's benefiting Putin, right, by creating

a situation where Poland is now more vulnerable, and a message is being said that the U.S. isn't going to support Poland, the same way the U.S. isn't supporting Ukraine, at the same way Donald Trump is saying that he may withhold the weapons that are supposed to go to Taiwan after meeting with Xi Jinping, as Donald Trump's doing all of that. I mean, you see our adversaries, you see Russia and China, Kim Jong-un and Iran, you know,

all rising, pretty clear what's happening.

Let me know what you think, hit subscribe, let's get to 7 million subscribers, thanks for

watching everybody.