Hegseth Cracks during Cross-Examination over War

House Armed Services Committee. He was flailing, he was yelling, he was looking like a cornered rat. Let me show you what went down during this pitch-perfect cross-examination of Higgsith. First, you had Democratic Congress member, Car Bahall, Cross-examined Higgsith, and also pointing out just how incompetent Higgsith is. Here, play this clip. Mr. Higgsith, I stand by what I said last time you were here. You were incompetent then,

you're incompetent now, and you're the gift that keeps on giving when it comes to incompetence. Without Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Gentlemen, you're back. You're not rather than that. I'm doing gentlemen. Thank you. Next, you had Democratic Congresswoman Hula Hand, Cross-examined Higgsith, as he refused to say why General Randy George, the former Army Chief of Staff, was fired, via text message by Higgsith. Here, play this clip.

It's a problem. I'm going to reclaim my time. General George, let's talk about a guy who's a patriot. Somebody who every single person here in this dias and down there in that audience and

“out there in this world has huge admiration for. Why did he get fired?”

Well, as with any moves we make with General Officers, first of all, I thank them for their service, and ultimately my impression is you thanked him by a text or a phone call. You didn't

even do it to his face. On respect for these officers, we never talk about the nature of their

removal, but every one of them, including myself, knows that they serve the pleasure of the president. Ultimately, on respect to these officers, we don't reveal it. However, I will note, it's very difficult to change the culture of a department that was been destroyed by the wrong perspectives. So you came off of General George's story to culture? There are many, we've gotten rid of many General Officers in this administration because

we need new leaders here. You have no way of explaining why you fired one of the most decorated and remarkable men who's needed new leadership. And so your answer is a very immature way of responding to my request. Further, during the cross-examination by Congresswoman Hula Hand, Higgsith refused to say how many more months would be required to conclude the catastrophic and disastrous war in Iran play this clip? Despite the fact that your recent comments indicate

that operations appear to be finished, it's clearly, there clearly is more work that needs to be done.

“As mentioned today, is indeed 60 days. So Mr. Secretary, how many more months just order of magnitude?”

Do you think that you're going to need to be able to conclude operations successfully? And how many more billions of dollars do you think you're going to ask this body for?

As you know, and as the president has stated, you would never tell your adversary,

especially once that is the line that you always. Especially once you've been in order to decimated their military and you control their trade. How long you would be committed to the mission? Next Democratic Congress member, Vinnman, Cross-Exam, and Higgsith, and said so Higgsith, are you blaming your daddy now for this war? Trump's your daddy. You blaming daddy. You're a play this clip for President Trump overwhelmingly.

But the president ordered the strike, is that correct? Which strike are you referring to? The strike on Iran, the war that we're in. And of course, I mean, he's the commander of the chief. He sounds like the calls. It sounds like you're blaming daddy for the mess we're in. And I don't think he's going to be particularly happy with you. I see what you're trying to do. There's no daylight in this mission on this

on this campaign. I'm asking you in advance. I'm asking you in advance. And shoulder to shoulder with this admit. It's blaming my time. More from Democratic Congress member, Vinnman here as well, saying, uh, you believe that the

“American people voted for this catastrophic war in Iran. That's what you testified to during your”

opening statement. Watch this. Play this clip. Close. And so I just want to kind of give you the state of play right now. It's been two months of war. Uh, we have hopes for a resolution, but the war continues really. Iran has closed the straight. And we've now gone in and blockated their ports of one fifth of the world's oil is unable to transit the straight. And the American people and the department are paying significantly more. And you also said that this is what the American

people actually voted for. But actually, um, the American people voted for a promise not to get into Middle Eastern wars. And they voted for lower, lower prices. And this is the exact opposite of what they got. So let me ask you this, um, the president ordered the strike. Is that correct?

The president's been saying for over 30 years that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.

So he's got very clear as a position among the American people voted for President Trump overwhelmingly. That voted for that. But the president ordered the strike. Is that correct? And then we heard this cross-examination from Democratic Congress member, Goodlinder,

unlawful orders? And then hex is like, What a partisan talking point that is here, play this clip of American

“law that our service members follow lawful orders and lawful orders only. Is that right?”

Do you agree with the statement quote, the military won't follow unlawful orders? I do. Mr. Hexette, do you agree with that statement? I do, but understand what you're insinuating in a partisan point. I'm not. I'm actually quoting you directly, Mr. Hexette, from April 12th, 2016. And I appreciate that on the record, you've clarified this important principle of America. Then at least times expired. Next up,

Democratic Congress member, Molten, a veteran himself was cross-examining Hexette. Hexette was standing by his no-quarter statement, which is a war crime, or Hexette said that if, um, in a war, people are surrendering, you are allowed to kill them and show them no-quarter. Watch this cross-examination by Molten here play this clip. Now, quickly, on March 13th in a press conference, you said we will give them no-quarter no mercy. In order for no-quarter or no survivors is a war

crime under the Geneva conventions. You understand that's murder. Do you stand by that statement? The Department of War fights to win. And we ensure that our war fighters have the rules of engagement necessary to be, as a fact, so just to many please, you'll call Democratic members of Congress to be tried for sedition for reminding our troops to follow law. But when you tell them the commitment of war crime, you stand by yourself. For insinuating the laws that we're giving them

are more cross-examination from Molten right here, let's play it. Okay, so let's just imagine.

“Which, by the way, if they had one, which you're far much, you should allow them, including the”

first Trump administration, they had prevented them from having a nuclear weapon. So,

listen, how is this war going? Do you think we're winning? Militarily on the battlefield, it's been an astounding military success. But are we winning the war? Absolutely. Okay, so do you call Iran closing the straight-of-war moves winning? Well, I would say the blockade that we hold that doesn't allow anything to come in or out of Iranian ports. Okay, so we've blockaded their blockades. They blockaded us and then we blockaded their

blockade. That's like saying tag your hit or, you know, if President Madison has said, well, the British has burned down Washington, but don't worry, we're going to burn it down as well. And we heard from another veteran on this committee, Democratic Congress member delusio from the Pittsburgh region, watch his cross-examination of Higgsith right here, play this clip. But this earlier, you said it, and I think your press conference, essentially, in

unquote, you hear no quarter, no mercy for enemies. That's the end of the quote. Is your guidance that you expect our troops in harm's way if there's a foreign enemy surrendering laying down their arms, they're supposed to provide no quarter and kill them? You denied it, but you were indeed trying to take the chairman to a partisan place. That was General Milley. That was the previous administration, which played politics. We don't play that

simple question. I'm asking you why you win and we ensure the rules of engagements are such that our troops have every authority possible to do. I'll give you another chance. In saying that,

“are you trying to tell commanders that that's what you expect. You're in the chain of command.”

It's a simple question. I understand that. My command is no exactly what the guidance is with each and every mission. And I know every tool in there is closing to answer it. I think you speak volumes. I think that's a dangerous thing. We all know the expectations. We know the law of war. We know what is lawful. I'd expect our commanders understand that as well. I yield back. And then another veteran, Democratic Congress member Ryan was cross-examining

Higgs if watch what went down. Let's play this clip. Let's maximize the cross theater. Let's talk about what the fact is they had. Prior to the attack officers on the ground, new our troops were vulnerable. In fact, they requested additional force protection. Did they receive it?

We were ever humanly possible force protection. Not counter UAS. They've always made available.

They did not. In fact, when asked to describe the base's defense, one survivor who's come forward from the unit said, quote, "I mean, I would put it in the none category from a drone defense capability, none." So let's be clear, no counter drone capabilities, no counter rocket systems, no counter mortar, or counter artillery. Not even the basic overhead protection that U and I had 20 years ago in rock and now six of our soldiers are dead. The next day, you downplayed the attack. You said it was

a squirter that squeaked through four to five defenses. But since then, thankfully, brave survivors have come forward to set the record straight. One of our surviving soldiers told CBS, quote, painting a picture that one squeak through is a falsehood.

It was not a fortified position. Another survivor said the building's protection was about as

“weak as one gets. Secretary Hag Seth, that is obviously in direct contradiction to what you said”

from the Pentagon podium the next day. So are you saying that these soldiers, our soldiers, who survive this horrific attack are lying? What I'm saying is before the commencement of the conflict, we put in maximum defensive posture. We could. It's a direct, we moved seven, they said. In this, in this directing, I gotta speak, or you just got a monologue falsehoods all over the place. It's not a falsehood. We moved seven, you five hundred troops. Reflaming my time. Because you

yelled, doesn't make you right. Just because you yelled, doesn't make you right. My time on behalf of these survivors. You just said what they said is a falsehood. There's a much larger picture, there's a much larger picture at play here that included integrated air defenses, bunkers, moving people off the line. Mr. Secretary, they were not part of the target. We moved those troops and all across the theater. Thousands of troops off the X off of their bases because we

knew what Iran was going to try to strike. We knew there was no tragic moment. No, it was something you could get through. Of course, that's the consequence of my time. And we remember those six every single day. I want to play games with I'm not playing games. I want to win this 20 more

“quote from a survivor of the attack. And I was on the record telling the truth is important. And we're”

not going to learn from these mistakes. If we pretend these mistakes didn't happen. Secretary Hicks have those soldiers told the truth. Those soldiers are braver than you are. I commend they are asking for accountability. They deserve accountability. And I'm asking for the same starting with you. And as I said a year ago, you need to resign immediately. I commend those people back. More cross-examination from Democratic Congress member delusio right here. Let's play it.

Secretary, you heard direct quotes from some of them via CBS's reporting. They were willing to talk to the press. Things like they were unprepared, providing defense for themselves in the unit. Things like we removed closer to Iran to a deeply unsafe area that was in known target. Your spokesperson, Sean Parnell, in response to that reporting said it was not true.

“Do you agree with that? He was calling these guys liars. I'm not calling our troops liars and I don't”

know if what you're representing is correct or not. I'll take you at your word on that. But all I know is that we took every effort possible at the commencement of this campaign to ensure the defensive our troops to include moving them off of known bases to places that were not known. And we had internal understatement. And then those were fortified with bunkers, other fortifications with theater air defenses was our concern. I'm going to pause it there. I'm going to be seriously.

I'm going to be a charging me that I don't care. I'm asking you what you think their liars are. You know what I ask? You are disparaging me that I don't care about the passing of our troops. Nope. I ask you to go dot their liars. But Terry, that's disparaging and smearing in every way. Nobody cares more about fate of our troops. Nobody cares about the health of our troops. No one wants to bring them all hopeful. I understand, but he controls the time. He controls the time.

You could control your answer and the gentleman's right for allow to answer Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Secretary, my question was clear whether you thought they were liars or not. You don't seem to want to answer it. We can move on. Then under questioning by the ranking member on this committee Democratic Congress member Smith. Finally, a DOD official in the Trump regime admits that the

Iran war has already cost at least $25 billion. Let's play this clip or strike you in the

conversation here. We have not yet received from the Pentagon the costs of the war. So just for the record, we'd like to get that as soon as possible. Certainly, the munitions expanded, but also under-reported is we've had a fair amount of equipment destroyed, including two C-130s with the rest of our downed airmen. So do you have either a, a cost estimate coming to us any time soon or be a specific supplemental request? Thank you for that question. So approximately

this day, we're spending about $25 billion on operation epic fury. Most of that is munitions. There's part of that it's obviously aluminum and equipment placement. We will formulate a supplemental through the White House that will come to Congress. So once we have a full assessment of the

cost of the conflict, David, so you're saying full cost of this point is $25 billion.

Yeah, that's our estimate for the cost. Okay. Interesting, because we, I'm glad you answered that question, because we've been asking for a hell of a long time and no one's given us the number. So if you could get those details over to us, that would be great.

really ran into trouble throughout this cross-examination. He claimed that Iran's nuclear

“facilities were obliterated, but then when Smith pointed out well, how are they obliterated?”

But you claim that their nuclear capabilities posed an imminent threat to which heggsiff then compared to, well, they have nuclear ambitions. Their ambitions were an imminent threat. But they had all of these conventional ballistic and cruise missiles, like North Korea. Well, heggsiff, thanks for bringing up North Korea. We're Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un exchange love letters,

and Kim Jong-un ultimately was able to build nuclear weapons. And now he's apparently

bragging about producing 10 nuclear warheads like a month and building the largest nuclear arsenal, but because Donald Trump's so utterly pathetic, and because our media is so compliant, nobody really talks about that other than independent media. And I'll see you at the mic's touch, network leading the way. You're a play this clip who's hell bent on getting a nuclear weapon and get them to a point where they're at the table, giving it up in a way that they

haven't haven't. So they haven't broken yet. Okay, we haven't gotten there yet for all of the well, their nuclear facilities have been obliterated, underground, they're buried, and we'll watch you. Well, 24/7. So we know where any nuclear material, be climbing anytime for watching a second here. We had to start this war. You just said,

60 days ago, because the nuclear weapon was an imminent threat. Now you're saying that it was

completely obliterated. They had not given up their nuclear ambitions, and they had a conventional shield of thousands of operation midnight and a week is a moment, nothing of substance, so the obviously that existing in the point place we were before. So there's facilities are rumored and obliterated. Their ambitions continued, and they're building a conventional shield. Let me try again. It's the North Korea strategy. You know, this very well, the North

Korea strategy was used conventional missiles to prevent anybody from challenging them, so they could slow walk their way to a weapon. President Trump saw Iran at its weakest moment, took an action to ensure in a way that only the United States of America could do with ours really partners. And yet to ensure there will have an event in the field was, was probably one of the worst we've done if I could get to it. More cross-examination here

from Democratic Congress member Adam Smith of Heggsip, where Smith's like, how are you just so wrong on Ukraine? Right, 14 months ago, didn't you say that Ukraine was going to be completely conquered by Russia? So they better make the best deal. They could like, you're objectively don't know what you're talking about. How do you square that to which Heggs is like, Joe Biden? Joe Biden? What does Joe Biden have to do with any of it? It makes no sense.

You're playing this clip. So on Ukraine, a year or plus ago, your advice, the President's advice was Ukraine had no cards to play. They should go cut the best possible deal they could. Clearly that was wrong. What did you miss? What did you miss about the conflict between Russia and Ukraine that you didn't see that Ukraine was going to be capable of doing what they've done in the last 14 months? Well, we didn't miss and we're hearing this committee is that Joe Biden

with no accountability gave hundreds of billions of dollars of our weapons to Ukraine to an outcome

that never would have happened if President Trump was a question. So he pulled out our, you guys

want to talk about that. Ultimately, President Trump believes there's a key steal between Russia and Ukraine. So if you didn't expect Ukraine, where they're at right now, I'm asking you just from a strategic

“standpoint. What I think Ukraine's have shown a great courage. And I appreciate that Europe is now”

paying for the web any of the things that we provide. All right, I yield back. Thank you. Then we heard from Democratic Congress member, Roe Kanna, who questioned Higgsith about the costs of this war. Higgsith just founded funny. Higgsith was laughing that you and all the American people out there and people throughout the world are suffering economically because of Donald Trump and this despicable war play this clip. How much did it cost American taxpayers in terms of the strike

to the Iranian school where kids were killed? You have that number. In terms of the missiles we used as I've said that unfortunate situation remains under investigation. You don't know how it's taken back, but I wouldn't tie a cost to that to anything. It's a reasonable question, no sir. I mean, our taxpayer money was going there. Do you know how much it will cost Americans in terms of their increased cost in gas and food over the next year because of the Iran war?

I would simply ask you what the cost is of Iran in Japan. I'm going to give you that. I would simply ask you what the plane got to question about the best things. I'm not you're asking you're saying it's a gotcha question to ask what it's going to be in terms of the increase. Why won't you ask what it costs to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb? I give you that sir,

“but let me what would it cost? What would you pay to ensure Iran doesn't get a nuclear bomb?”

Do you what would it pay? I reclaimed my time. Do you not know you had no one do the analysis of what the increased cost of gas and food on the American people are going to be?

which means it's an increase of $5,000 a year for American households. Now, let me give you this point. You're saying that your operation is preventing a nuclear Iran. Will you acknowledge that there is an economic cost to the American people for doing what you believe is necessary to make Iran denuclear. Will you acknowledge the economic cost? We have an incredible economic team that's managing this better than, but what the previous administration is doing now is the previous administration.

You know what types of administration might be? And you're going to like this to explain my time. I mean, you know what is upsetting credible. You even do the analysis on how much it's costing the American people. It's one thing if you said, okay, cost the American people $5,000,

“but we think it's worth it. That's what we've done in World War II. In other words,”

here's what it costs. You got to pay for it. You don't even know what the average American is paying.

You don't know what we paid in terms of the missiles that hit the Iranian school. You don't know what we're paying in terms of gas. You don't know what we're paying in terms of food. Your 25 billion number is totally off. It's the incompetence. You think that's a gotcha question? I got asked the Americans right now who can't afford gas can't afford groceries, whose house made just about to be in foreclosure, who may be evicted. Tell them that's a gotcha

question, Higgs if more cross-examination here from Rokana, let's play it. Because you said you won't get us into bad wars. You said you wouldn't, you would bring down the prices. You know what I'm sad for? I'm sad for all the people who voted for Trump. I'm sad for them because you betrayed them. You betrayed a lot of that manga base. And you know who knows that? J.D. Vance knows that.

That's why I'm sorry. That's why I'm sorry. That was a gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Bacon.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Then under some questioning from Congresswoman Tukuda, Higgs said that Los Angeles would have been on fire last summer. If the military didn't intervene, we would have been on fire here. In Los Angeles, we would not have been on fire. We were perfectly beautiful. We didn't need you here. In fact, you made things horrible like you did throughout the rest of the country. You fascists here play this clip. Okay, very good. All right. Well,

Secretary Higgs said that if President Trump ordered you to deploy troops to polling places during the midterm elections as far, which would violate the law I just cited, would you implement his order? Yes or no? What you're trying to insinuate is that the president would give unlawful orders and we would somehow deploy troops as a result in the evidence of our

department is that we've worked alongside law enforcement very effectively for 15 months.

Los Angeles would have been on fire for the summer. Have we not come across? I-I-Hard. Sorry that, but this is not a historical phrase that I'm inferring on your president. In January of this year, told the New York Times that he regretted not ordering

“the National Guard to seize voting machines and key states after the 2020 election.”

More questioning from Tukuda right here. Let's play this clip. If a voting place is with 250 years ago, we're talking 20 to 20. So if the president, again, I'm asking you orders you to break election law, violate the Constitution and the law, would you follow the orders of the president? Yes or no? The president, you'd like to insinuate that the president issues. It's a simple question, isn't it? No. Who would you follow the president

or the Constitution? I will note that in 2024 troops were deployed to polling locations in 15 states. 2024, Joe Biden troops deployed to polling locations in 15 states. Explain that one to me. I am asking you a question now. You seem to really like Joe Biden. You've brought his name up more than many other topics today. Answer the question. Really exit? Biden put army, put the army in polling locations. I mean, these people live in their fake dystopian world that just

doesn't exist and they want us to conform to all of their lives. It's such garbage. There's such garbage humans, these people. More cross-examination from Tukuda right here. Let's play it.

“Answer the question. Who are you beholden to Mr. Secretary, the president or the Constitution?”

Well, I'm very proud of that question. I'm very proud of the service president. I asked very proud of the service president. I asked a very proud of the service president. I asked a very colleague in Los Angeles. He couldn't answer that either. So I think our answer is very clear. Obviously, you have taken a lot of loyalty only to the president and not the people of this country. Then we got additional questioning from Democratic Congress member Molten, where it would

Hexif is asked if he considered the risk of the closure of the strait of Hormuz ahead of time. Watch his response. Play this clip. Inch of military options that are carefully considered with the associated risks, with those options and the considerations they're in. Mr. Secretary, did you consider this risk? Of course, this department has looked at all aspects of this risk.

Well, it's just a part of mine. Look, we've heard the only mine sweepers we had in the Gulf to sing a pour weeks before the war started. We have lots of capabilities that you may or may not be aware of at the class of five level.

You're talking about a perspective future battleship which we welcome in the fleet.

“Okay. So you're supportive of the other battleships?”

Yes, sir. Okay. Then under questioning from Congresswoman Strictlin, Hexif repeatedly refuses to explain why General Randy George was removed from his position in the middle of the war. Why would you remove a four-star army chief of staff? One of the most beloved people in our military, if not the most beloved, were you jealous of him? You pathetic, you pathetic stewed you here playing this clip? No one is disputing that senior officers

serve at the pleasure of civilian leadership. The issue in front of this is whether to decision to remove General Randy George, strengthen the army, or create an avoidable disruption during an active operational period. General George who also served as commanding general at first core at JBLM has been serving for four decades, including multiple command and operational leadership roles, culminating as chief of staff of the army responsible for readiness, force modernization,

and the welfare of over a million soldiers and civilians. He was removed in the middle of an

active conflict involving U.S. operations against Iran when leadership continuity is most critical.

Look reporting indicates that General George's removal may have followed disagreements over army personnel matters, including concerns regarding withheld promotions. So my question Secretary, is this, what specific national security risk, mission risk, or leadership concern, did General George present that justified removing him in the middle of a conflict, or was he removed because he challenged some decisions being made? As I stated earlier, out of respect to these officers,

I don't discuss the nature of the removal, but I would ask an earnest question of you. Where does

“General George fall in the operational chain of command? So I'm asking you, why did you fire him?”

But don't you talk about, you talked about an operational moment? Where does General George answer the question? No, it's a super question. You're on the House of Service? Leadership concern, what did he present that justified removing him in the middle of a conflict? Do you know where General George serves and the operational chain of command? So my, I'm new, I'm asking you my question one more time, sir. Don't try to flip it on me.

Why was he removed? Was he a national security risk? Mission risk, or leadership concern? We don't. Yes or no? We don't talk about the nature of removal. But you also want to answer where he is in the operational chain of command because he isn't in it. He isn't in the operational chain. You're likely to reclaim your time. You want to tie it to the war, but you don't know where he is in the chain of command? It's the General Lady for Washington's time. Then Congresswoman Jacob just went off on him. Let's play it.

The same courage that Democrats had. Mr. Secretary, you keep saying that he is the best commander in chief. We've ever had the best ocean to the troops. 13 American troops have died. More than 380 have been wounded.

The Strait of Hormuz, which was wide open, is now closed. Less than 90 percent of traffic

through the Strait is still not going despite the ceasefire. The Iranian regime is still in power. It still has nuclear material. The war is costing Americans billions of dollars. And Mr. Secretary, if you think that this is what winning looks like, then maybe we should be questioning your mental stability. Maybe you are the one responsible for this failure. And the President should think about replacing you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Good lady, you're for that. On the right.

Rick, that's not the right time for Virginia Miss Kiggins. Hegs had refused to explain Donald Trump's Jesus post. Let's play it. Well, I, I, I, I, I do know this is not a partisan thing. In fact, many, many Democrats have had, many, many Republicans have had these same questions. Marjorie Taylor Green said he's out of control. And he's gone insane. Candace Owen said the 75th amendment needs to be invoked. Megan Kelly Tucker Carlson, who used to work with Alex Jones, Stephanie Grisham, the

lifts could go on. So how do I explain to my constituents that while they are in harm's way, their commander and chief is posting these unhinged posts? How do you explain your current constituents what happened on October 5th? Or what happened at Afghanistan? Or what happened with the debacle low withdrawal in Afghanistan? Where the troops were left? How did you explain that well by leadership? How did you explain that to the Marine that didn't get metal? The we restored

their metals because of that disaster. You know what's playing that right now? When Joe Biden was asleep at the wheel and he had an A-wall secretary. How do you explain this next post? How can I explain this next post to my constituents? I'm Jewish, so this doesn't really bother me, but my

“understanding is that this is quite offensive to many Christians. So how do you explain this post?”

I'm not here to explain post. We have an incredible commander and chief who puts our troops first.

I'm here for a budget hearing about our troops. This is historic budget that's getting into this. Mr. Secretary. Mr. Secretary. Mr. President Trump is doing that. This is a world-class fashion. This is a world-class history. This is a world-class history. This is a world-class history. This is about our

being sent into harm's way under good strategy. The mental stability of our commander-in-chief is

deeply important to our troops. It's deeply important to this country. It is... It wasn't important to you during your Biden. I'll remind you that when there were concerns Democrats came together and he was not our nominee for President. So I encourage you to do have the same courage that Democrats had. But heggs it says, "Oh Donald Trump is the sharpest commander-in-chief. We've had in generations play this clip."

So Mr. Secretary, you are with the President a lot. And it pains me to even have to ask this about our President. But my constituents' lives are at stake. Do you believe that the President

“is mentally stable enough to be the commander-in-chief?”

Did you ask the same question of Joe Biden for four years?

Mr. Secretary Joe Biden is not the President. Mr. Trump has been President for a year and a half

and I'm asking you to not. And I won't even engage with the level of disparagement that you're putting on the commander-in-chief who indeed is... I mean, every... Mr. Secretary... Mr. Secretary... Mr. Secretary Biden is not the president. It's most insightful commander-in-chief we've had in generations. And you want to compare... I mean, you want to ask that question after you and your fellow Democrats defended Joe Biden

who could barely speak. Mr. Secretary, as you know, he doesn't know. Autopens. When? When a Secretary of Defense who went a while for a week, Mr. Secretary, for ten days. I will reclaim my time. You're in ladies' time. Thank you. There was some other line of questioning also to some of the other individuals at that table that's worth pointing out like when the under-secretary of defense

basically the Comtroller would an answer if he had signal and then General Kane said that he had

signal on his phone but wouldn't say but then he wanted to change his answer. Well, maybe I have it on my personal. I don't know if I have it on my military. I call these people

“are so freaking compromised. Play this clip. Mr. Hurst, do you have signal on your phone?”

I'm sorry, why is this relevant? Do you have signal on your phone? What does this have to do with the budget? I'm going to take that as a yes. Mr. Kane, sorry, General Kane, do you have signal on your phone? I do, sir, yes. Okay, so I want to talk about signal. Last year, the Secretary and other administration officials discussed sensitive and almost certainly classified information about

a striking Yemen using the unclassified signal app. Mr. What's the current policy for signal on official DOD devices? Of the Comtroller? I don't do COO work. So therefore, it is allowed? Is that your statement that it is now allowed to have signal on your device? Mr. White said my statement is I've run the budget for DOD. Yeah. Okay, well, he's got it on his phone. So therefore it must be permitted. I got to go back and look if it's on my official phone.

I was talking about my personal phone. I'm not exactly sure. I'll go back and look though. Okay. Last month, FBI Director Cash Patel made a public announcement that Russian hackers are targeting signal app users in the government. Specifically stated they were targeting individuals of high intelligence value, including current and former U.S. government officials. I hope that it is not official policy that you can have signal on your official phones.

And I would love to get a response from the department on that. And then Secretary Higgs had said he was the one who terminated the investigation into the Apache helicopter pilots who fly kid rock around. Seems like on a daily basis now, these Apache helicopters are with kid rock, so-demented, so-drain, so corrupt. Play this clip. An investigation was launched by the 101st combat aviation brigade command leadership. But before that review is completed on March 31st,

“you terminated it via social media posts. Did you personally direct termination of that review?”

I did. Okay. Now, the president said they probably shouldn't have been doing it and that I'd take a look at it. So did you talk to the president before terminating that review? I don't relay what I talk about with that. Okay. I think unfortunately, that means that you did talk to him, which in turn means that you've just confirmed the president himself overruled the leadership of the 101st airborne. Mr. Secretary, you yourself have affirmed what I said.

The need for higher standards and higher accountability at every level of your agency. Commanders rely on established processes to uphold these standards. How does canceling a command initiated review by the 101st airborne leadership support, a culture of accountability? Actually, I think I'll ask that out of the chairman. Sure. Back to my earlier comments about the importance in my role of staying in the middle.

What you're alluding to is in my assessment with deeper spec for your ask is a partisan question. And I think it would be inappropriate for me to answer that. Sir, I actually don't think it is. I think it is actually a fundamental principle of accountability in our department. And I think it was the wrong decision. I'm going to close by just saying one thing, Mr. Secretary, you started this hearing by politicizing it. There you have it folks.

but double check that you're actually subscribed. It helped us hit 7 million subscribers. Thank you all so much for watching. We appreciate you so much.