Iraq War vet explains why Hegseth 'troubles' him more than 'more than any other Trump pick'
Former Fox News host Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump's embattled nominee for secretary of defense, has been facing allegations of sexual assault (which he flatly denies), public drunkenness and severe alcohol abuse. And he is so controversial that in December, Trump was reportedly considering nominating Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for the position.
Yet Hegseth is still the nominee, and Trump's MAGA allies have been waging an intense campaign to pressure GOP senators into voting to confirm him. Far-right MAGA attorney Mike Davis, known for his violent and inflammatory rhetoric, has even called for private investigations of senators who oppose Hegseth and other controversial Trump nominees.
In an op-ed published by the New York Times on January 2, U.S. Marine Corps veteran Phil Klay lays out some reasons why he finds the Hegseth nomination so troubling.
READ MORE: 'False!' CNN's Jim Acosta confronts GOP operative on latest Trump claim
"How a second-term President Trump will lead the military is an open question," Klay argues. "His inconstancy and lack of ideological commitment make it impossible to know. But his proposed Cabinet appointments give us at least some idea of what he hopes the future will be. And more than any other pick, it is Pete Hegseth, whom Mr. Trump has chosen to be the next secretary of defense, who troubles me."
Klay, an Iraq War veteran, continues, "There's a swirl of controversies and concerns around Mr. Hegseth that make it difficult to focus on what's important. But most notable to me, because it strikes at the core of the honor of the American military, is his signature achievement as a political advocate: helping persuade Mr. Trump to intervene in the cases of three men accused or convicted of war crimes."
The men Klay is referring to are Clint Lorance, Mathew L. Golsteyn, and Edward Gallagher.
In 2019, the New York Times' Dave Philipps reported that Golsteyn "was facing murder charges for killing an unarmed Afghan he believed was a Taliban bomb maker" — while Gallagher "was acquitted of murder charges but convicted of a lesser offense in a high-profile war crimes case over the summer."
READ MORE: 'Emergency break glass option' on the table for Republicans to rush Trump certification
Lorance, Philipps reported in 2019, was "serving a 19-year sentence for the murder of two civilians."
Klay recalls that testimony against Lorance "meant nothing to the elite media personalities like Sean Hannity and Mr. Hegseth who took up Mr. Lorance’s cause."
"There may be benefits to Mr. Trump's skepticism about major military commitments abroad," Klay argues. "But a military with neither moral purpose nor a commitment to moral conduct is a military that fights without honor."
READ MORE: 'Nice work, John Roberts': Trump's latest move said to be 'middle finger' to Supreme Court
Phil Klay's full New York Times op-ed is available at this link (subscription required).
