the ability to relieve bonded indebtedness of struggling freshwater communities. they must be able to financially reinvest to upgrade their freshwater systems in places like flint, detroit, toledo, cleveland, youngstown, milwaukee, kenosha, chicago and so many more, freshwater is life. the old expression, go west or south, young man, still appeals. but our planet is teaching us there are limits to what the earth can sustain. living in the past is not an option. onward america together. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon today.therd

organization as executive director. >> in between, i went to harvard university for two years. >> i want to ask you about concerned veterans for america. the 990's from that organization, i ask that that be made part of the record. >> without objection. both of those are part of the record. >> at the end of 2013, a shortfall of 100 $30,000. at the end of 2014, a shortfall of 128,000 dollars. another deficit of 437 thousand dollars. by the time you left that

organization, there were deep debts including credit card transaction debts of about $75,000. that is not the kind of fiscal management that we want at the department of defense. we cannot tolerate that at the department of defense. that is an organization with a bunch of $850 billion, not 10 million or 15 million which was the case at those two organizations. it has commander responsibility for 3.4 million americans, the highest number that you managed in those two organizations was maybe 50 people. let me ask you, how many men and women now serve in the united states army? mr. hegseth: i would like the opportunity to respond.

concerned veterans for america. you are on the v.a. committee and i appreciate your service. the v.a. accountability act and the mission act were brainchild of concerned veterans for america. we used our donor money very intentionally and focused to create policy that bettered the lives of veterans. >> mr. hegseth i am asking you a very simple question. how many serve in the united states army? >> 450,000 on active duty. >> how many in the navy? >> 425. >> 327 this year. how many in the marine corps? >> 175,000. >> 172,300. those numbers dwarf any experience you have by many multiples. i do not believe that you can tell this committee or the

people of america mollified to lead them. i would support you as a spokesperson for the pentagon. i do not dispute your communication skills. i believe we are entitled to the facts. i have asked for more documents. i assume you would be willing to submit to a background check that interviews your colleagues, accountants, ex-wives, former spouses, sexual assault survivors and others and enable them to come forward. >> i am not in charge of fbi and background checks. >> but you would submit? >> i am not in charge of fbi and background checks. >> thank you, senator blumenthal. i want to submit a letter from the founder of veterans for freedom and the person who hired

pete hegseth to run the organization. although the 2008 financial crisis dried up fundraising for nonprofits, he says, "pete responded with decisive action by reducing staff and renegotiating all debts with creditors until they were fairly resolved, an impressive feat and testament to his character. he departed in 2010 to take on a new role with concerned veterans for america. without objection, this will be added to the record. senator ernst, you are recognized. >> i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter submitted by mr. mark lucas who is a fellow island and iowa army national guard member. mr. lucas and i served together

in the national guard. he succeeded pete hegseth as executive director for concerned veterans for america and in his letter mr. lucas says that pete hegseth laid a strong foundation that postured cva for long-term success and that mr. hegseth continued to be a valuable asset to both me as a leader and the organization. i would ask for unanimous consent to enter this washington times article and the letter from mr. mark lucas into the record. >> without objection. >> thank you, mr. chair. good morning mr. hegseth. thanks very much. i appreciate your service to our nation. it is something i know you are very proud of. and it is something with that we have in common and that we share. we have had many productive conversations. just for our audience, we have

had very frank conversations, is that correct? mr. hegseth: that is a correct characterization. >> you know that i do not keep anything hidden. i pull no punches. my colleagues know that as well. i do appreciate you sitting down and allowing me the opportunity to question you thoroughly on those issues that are of great importance to me. just to recap those issues, three that are very important, one is the d.o.d. and making sure that we have a clean audit. the second is women in combat and we will talk more about that in a moment. the third was maintaining high standards and making sure that we are combating sexual assault in the military. i'm going to address the issue because this will tie into some of the financial concerns that

have been raised here as well. i am trusting my fellow iowan, and ask for unanimous consent for this to go into the record. like me a lot of iowans are concerned to upset about the wasteful washington spending and the pentagon. it is an issue that i have been combating for years. there is significant room for greater efficiency and cost cutting within the department. the d.o.d. is the only federal agency that has never passed an audit. as the senate doge caucus chair and found her, that is unacceptable to me and it should be unacceptable to you as well. i appreciate that you mention that in your opening statement. what are those steps you will take to ensure the pentagon has a clean audit by the year 2028? mr. hegseth: i appreciate your

work on this topic which you have been involved in for a long time. you mentioned concerned veterans for america. i just want to clarify, you have very generous donors who set a very clear budget that we stuck to every single year. the latitude was restricted and we worked very diligently. you who were the leader on the pentagon audit, when we met i said 2014 was the first year. we discovered a 2013 op-ed i wrote about the need for a pentagon audit because an audit is an issue of national security and respect to american taxpayers who give 850 billion dollars to the defense department and expect that we know where that money goes and if that money is going somewhere that does not add to tooth and instead goes to fat or tail or if it is wasted, we need to know that. i think previous secretaries of defense have not emphasized the strategic prerogative of an audit.

myself, my deputy and others already know that a pentagon audit will be the comptroller, others, central to ensuring that we find those dollars that can be used elsewhere legally under the law inside the pentagon. you have my word that it will be a priority. >> thank you. moving on to women in combat. i had the privilege of serving in uniform for over 23 years between our army reserves and are iowa army national guard. i did serve in kuwait and missions in iraq. it is incredibly important that i stress and i hope that, if confirmed, you continue to stress that every man and woman has opportunity to serve their country in uniform and do so on any level as long as they are meeting the standards that are set forward.

we talked about that in my office. i do believe in high standards. i was denied the opportunity to serve in any combat role because i have a lot of gray hair. the policy has changed since then. i have been around for quite a while. for the young women who are out there now and can meet those standards and again i will emphasize they should be very high standards. they must physically be able to achieve those standards so that they can complete their mission. but i want to know, let's make it very clear for everyone here today. as secretary of defense will you support women continuing to have the opportunity to serve in combat roles? mr. hegseth: senator, thank you for your service. as we discussed extensively. >> it is my privilege.

mr. hegseth: my answer is yes, exactly the way that you caveated it. women will have access to combat roles given the standards remain high and will have a review to ensure the standards have not been eroded in any one of these cases. that will be one of the first things we do at the pentagon is reviewing that in a gender-neutral way the standards, ensuring readiness, a meritocracy front and center. it will be the privilege of a lifetime to be the secretary of defense for all men and women who fight so heroically. they have so many other options. they decide to put their right hand up for our country. it would be an honor to lead them. >> we only have less than a minute left. we have also discussed this in my office. a priority of mine has been combating sexual assault in the military and making sure that all of our service members are

treated with dignity and respect. this has been so important. senator gillibrand and i have worked on this and we were able to get changes made to the uniform code of military justice to make sure that we have improvements on how we address the tragic will be life altering -- tragic and life altering issues from sexual assault. it will demand a time and attention from the pentagon under your watch if confirmed. as secretary of defense, will you appoint a senior level official dedicated to sexual assault prevention and response? mr. hegseth: as we have discussed, yes i will. >> my time is expired. thank you for your answers. >> senator hirono. >> thank you. mr. hegseth, welcome.

i am focused on your character, temperament and qualifications to do the job. i do appreciate the comments of ranking member reid and his concerns regarding your nomination. i share those concerns. as part of my responsibility as a member of this committee to ensure the fitness of all nominees who come before any of the committees on which i said, i asked the following initial questions first. since you became an adult have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature? mr. hegseth: no, senator. >> have you ever faced discipline or entered a settlement relating to this kind of conduct? mr. hegseth: senator, i was falsely accused in october of 2017. it was fully investigated and i was completely cleared. >> i do not think completely cleared is accurate.

the fact is that your own lawyer said that you entered into an nda and paid a person who accused you of raping her some money to make sure she did not file a complaint. moving on. as secretary you will be in charge of maintaining good order and discipline by enforcing the uniform code of military justice. in addition to the sexual assault allegations and by the way, the answer to my second question should have been yes. i have read multiple reports of you regularly being drunk at work including by people who worked with you at fox news. do you know that being drunk at work is prohibited for service members under the ucmj? yes or no. mr. hegseth: those are multiple falls anonymous reports peddled by nbc news in direct

contradiction to the people on the fox news channel who i worked with on the record and said i never did that. >> do you commit to holding leaders accountable at all levels, that includes you? frankly as secretary you will be on the job 24/7. you recently promised some of my republican colleagues that you stopped drinking, will not drink if confirmed, correct? mr. hegseth: absolutely. >> will you resign as secretary of defense if you drink on the job, which is a 24/7 decision? mr. hegseth: i have made this commitment? >> will you resign as secretary of defense if you drink on the job? >> it is the most important deployment -- >> i am not hearing an answer to my question. i will move on. you will not commit to resigning if you drink on the job. as secretary of defense you will

swear an oath to the constitution and not an oath to any man, woman or president, correct? mr. hegseth: on multiple occasions i have sworn an oath to the constitution and i'm proud to do so. >> in june of 2020 then president trump directed then secretary of defense mark esper tissue protesters in the legs in downtown washington, d.c., an order secretary esper refused to comply with. would you carry out such an order from president trump? mr. hegseth: i was in the washington, d.c. national guard unit in lafayette square. >> would you obey an order to shoot protesters in the legs as directed to secretary of state? >> -- set a church on fire and destroyed -- >> that sounds to me like you will comply with such an order. you will shoot protesters in the leg.

in recent weeks, refusing to rule out using military force to take over greenland and the panama canal and threatening to take and make cans of the 51st state. would you carry out an order from president trump to seize greenland, a territory of our native ally denmark, by force or would you comply with an order to take over the panama canal? mr. hegseth: i will emphasize that president trump received 77 million votes. >> we are not talking about the election. my question is would you use our military to take over greenland or an ally of denmark? mr. hegseth: one of the things president trump is good at is never strategically tipping his hand so i would never in this public forum give one way or another -- >> that sounds to me that you would contemplate carrying out such in order to invade

greenland and take over the panama canal. current d.o.d. policy allows service members and eligible dependents to be reimbursed for travel associated with noncovered reproductive health care including abortions. will you maintain this commonsense policy? mr. hegseth: senator, i have always been personally pro-life and president trump is as well and we will review all policies. our standard is whatever the president wants on this particular issue. >> if the president tells you that this policy will not be maintained, you will not enable our service members to seek reproductive care. that's what it sounds like to me. i am not hearing answers to my questions, mr. chairman. i just want to know that another area of serious concern to me is president trump saying he wants to use the military to help with mass deportations which would

cost millions of dollars and what that will do to readiness is very concerning. mr. hegseth, i have noticed a disturbing pattern. you previously have made a series of inflammatory statements about women in combat , lgbtq service members, muslim americans and democrats. since your nomination however you have walked those back on tv and interviews and most recently in your opening statements. you are no longer on fox and friends. if confirmed, your words, actions and decisions will have real impact on national security and our service members lives. there are close to 3 million personnel in the department of defense. $900 billion budget. i hardly think you are prepared to do the job. thank you, mr. chairman.

>> that was not a question mr. hegseth. thank you senator hirono. senator sullivan. >> mr. hegseth congratulations on your nomination and thank you for your service and sacrifice. now for the most important question you will receive all day. in 1935 before the congress the father of the united states air force general billy mitchell was testifying about a certain place in the world. he said, "i believe that in the future whoever holds this place will control the world. this location is the most strategic place in the world." what place was billy mitchell talking about and let me give you a hint, it was not greenland. mr. hegseth: i believe he was talking about alaska. >> great answer. if confirmed, will you commit to come with me to the great state of alaska and meet our warriors

on the front lines every day? mr. hegseth: senator, i have and as i mentioned in the past i did a brief training exercise at fort rain white -- fort wainwright and i look forward to returning. we are on the front lines with this new era of authoritarian integration -- aggression. in the last two years we have had chinese and russian naval task forces, joint strategic bomber taskforces. after his election president trump put out an extensive statement on alaska which included the following, "we will ensure alaska gets even more defensive vestments as we fully rebuild our military, especially as russia and china are making menacing moves in the. pacific." will you work on continuing to build up our military assets in

alaska to reestablish deterrence in the arctic and the indo pacific? mr. hegseth: if confirmed, it would be a pleasure to work alongside you and this committee to recognize the very real threat in the end of pacific. the very real ways even these past couple of weeks that russia has attempted to push around election and the real strategic significance of shipping lanes through the arctic. there are many ways in which alaska is strategically significant and with a necessary shift toward endo paycom, alaska will play an important role in that. >> i appreciate your focus on lethality and war fighting. we desperately need it. i want to provide a few example of the biden woke military which is not focused on readiness or lethality and i want your comments. nobody wants an extremist or

racist in our military but one of the most stressful things i have seen over the past four years as a senator on this committee is a marine corps reserve officer on day one of the biden administration playing up a false and insulting narrative that our military was full of racist and violent extremists. this reached a pinnacle in this committee when biden's policy called a number three guy at the pentagon testified that one of his top goals would be ending violent extremism and systemic racism within the ranks of the military. he had no data on this. the media loved it. fan the flames. wrote baloney stories. disappointingly some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle here reinforced this ridiculous narrative. one even suggested 10% of our uniformed military was

extremist. 300,000 members. ridiculous. right away from this committee on this other side of the aisle. mr. hegseth you have a lot of experience with our military. do you believe that the military is a systemically racist organization and if confirmed, will you commit to defend not denigrate our troops? mr. hegseth: senator, i was also offended by those comments. anyone who has been on active duty in the national guard understand it is fundamentally false. >> there are three studies. secretary austin put out one of them that said exactly what you just said. fundamentally false. mr. hegseth: senator, they knew it. anyone in the unit knew it. one could argue that if not the least, one of the least racist institutions in our country is the u.s. military. being a racist in our

military has not been tolerated. >> would you agree the u.s. military is one of the most forward leaning, probably one of the greatest civil rights organizations in american history? mr. hegseth: no doubt. >> let me turn to another one. last year in a hearing before this committee i called on the secretary of the navy to resign because he is failing in his ability to build ships. we are being completely out built in terms of ships by the chinese. yet this secretary of the navy has focus on climate change, not building ships and lethality. mr. hegseth if your secretary of the navy ends up focusing on climate change, will you commit to me to fire him? mr. hegseth: my secretary of the navy will not be focused on climate change in the navy.

just like the secretary of the air force will not be focused on lg powered fire jets -- fighter jets or the secretary will not be focused on electric powered tanks. >> i appreciate data. the other thing president biden did, his first executive order as president was to focus on transgender surgeries for active-duty troops. i am describing the woke military under biden under the last four years. if confirmed, will you issue an order saying that we will rip the biden yoke off the neck of our military and focus on lethality, how do you think the troops will react? mr. hegseth: i know the troops will rejoice. they will love it. we have already seen it in recruiting numbers. there has been a surge since president trump won the election. >> our military will follow that order? mr. hegseth: our military will

follow that order gladly because they want to focus on lethality and war fighting and get all of the woke political, political stuff out of the military. >> thank you senator sullivan. senator kaine. >> thank you mr. hegseth. looking forward to this opportunity. i want to return to the issue you referenced that occurred in california in 2017. at that time you were still married to your second wife, correct? mr. hegseth: i believe so. >> you had just fathered a child by a woman who would later become your third wife, correct? mr. hegseth: i was falsely charged, fully investigated and completely cleared. >> so you think you were cleared because you committed no crime? that is your definition of cleared? you had just fathered a child two months before by a woman who was not your wife. i am shocked you would say you are completely cleared.

can you so casually cheat on a second wife and cheat on the mother of a child who had been born two months before and tell us you are completely cleared? how is that a complete clear? mr. hegseth: her child's name is gwendolyn hope hegseth and she is a child of god. >> and you cheated on the mother of that child less than two months after she was born, didn't you? mr. hegseth: those are false charges. >> you have admitted that you had sex at that hotel in october 20 17. you said it was consensual, is that correct? you have admitted that it was consensual and you were still married oh you just had a child by another woman. mr. hegseth: false charges against me, fully invested and completely cleared. >> you admitted that you had sex after you were married to wife to after you fathered a

child to wife three. . that would be disqualifying as secretary of defense, wouldn't it? mr. hegseth: that is a false claim then and a false claim now. >> if it had been sexual assault, that would been disqualifying as secretary of defense, wasn't it? mr. hegseth: that is a. >> false>> claim you cannot tell me whether someone who has committed sexual assault is disqualified from being secretary of defense? mr. hegseth: i know in my instance and my instance only, it was a false claim. >> but you acknowledge that you cheated on your wife and you cheated on the woman by whom you had just fathered a child? you admitted that? mr. hegseth: i will allow your words to speak for themselves. >> you are not retracting. that is good i assume you have taken an oath to your wife

. you have taken an oath, is that correct? >> i have failed in things in my life and thankfully i am redeemed by my lord and savior. >> where their nondisclosure agreements in connection with those divorces? mr. hegseth: not that i'm aware of. >> would you agree to release those wives from confidentiality agreements? mr. hegseth: that is not something i'm aware of. >> but if you were, you would agree to release them from confidentiality? did you engage in any acts of violence against your wives? mr. hegseth: absolutely not. >> but if someone had committed physical violence against a spouse, that would be disqualifying to serve as secretary of defense, correct? mr. hegseth: absolutely not have i ever done that. >> you would be that -- you agree that would be a disqualifying offense? mr. hegseth: you are talking

about a hypothetical. >> i don't think it is a hypothetical. violence against spouses occurs every day and if you as a leader are not capable of saying that physical violence against a spouse should be a disqualifying fact for being secretary of the most powerful nation in the world, you are demonstrating an astonishing lack of judgment. the incident in monterey led to a criminal investigation, a charge, a private settlement and cash payment to the woman who filed a complaint and there was also a nondisclosure agreement, correct? mr. hegseth: it was a confidential settlement agreement off of a nuisance lawsuit. >> during an interview you claimed that you settled the matter because you were worried that if it became public it might hurt your career. you maintain you are blackmailed? mr. hegseth: i maintained that false claims were made against me. >> your attorney used the phrase -- mr. hegseth: i had the opportunity to attest my innocence in those false claims. >> you did not reveal any of

this to the president trump as they were considering you. you did not reveal the action, the criminal complaint, the criminal investigation. you did not reveal the settlement. you did not reveal the cash payment. why didn't you inform the commander-in-chief and the transition team of this very relevant event? mr. hegseth: i have appreciated every part of the process with the transition team. they have been open and honest with me. we have had great conversations between the two of us. i appreciate the opportunity that the president-elect -- >> but you chose not to reveal this because you knew it would hurt your chances so you chose not to reveal this important thing to the commander-in-chief will be the transition team because you were worried about your chances rather than trying to be candid with the future president of the united states. are there any other important facts that you chose not to reveal to the president-elect and his team as they were considering you to be secretary

of defense? mr. hegseth: i sit here before you an open book as everyone who has watched this process. >> with multiple nondisclosure and confidentiality agreements. much has been made of your workplace behavior as a leader of nonprofit veterans organizations and a fox news contributor. were you fired from either of the leadership positions from the nonprofits? mr. hegseth: i was the leader of veterans for america. i was never fired -- >> do you have nondisclosure agreements with either of those organizations? mr. hegseth: not that i am aware of. >> many of your colleagues say that you show up to work under the influence of alcohol. i know you deny that but you would agree that if that were the case, that would be disqualifying for someone trying to be secretary of defense. mr. hegseth: those are anonymous false claims. >> they are not anonymous. they are not anonymous.

we have seen more records with names attached to them. one of your colleagues said that you got drunk at an event at a bar and chanted "kill all muslims." another colleague said that you took coworkers to a strip club. you were drunk and tried to dance with strippers. you had to be held off the stage and one of your employees in that event filed a sexual harassment charge as a result of it. i know you denied these things but isn't that the kind of behavior that if true would be disqualifying for someone to be secretary of defense? mr. hegseth: anonymous false charges. >> they are not anonymous. i will conclude and say this to the chairman. you claimed this was all anonymous. we have seen records with names attached to all of these included the name of your own mother. not make this into some anonymous press thing.

we have seen multiple names of colleagues consistently throughout your career that have talked about your abusive actions. >> he is way over time. >> i now yield. >> thank you very much. i ask unanimous to enter into the record a family court order concerning the appointment of parenting time between mr. hegseth and ms. samantha heg seth. it states that there were no claims of domestic abuse or probable abuse in the relationship. this will be added to the record. we now move to senator cramer. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you mr. hegseth for your service and willingness to endure this. i am sorry for what has been

happening to you. particularly the idea that you should have to sit there and answer hypothetical, somebody's imagination crimes that may take place at some point and wouldn't that disqualify you if you were a murderer or if you were a rapist. unfair. i'm embarrassed for this behavior. first i want to say thank you for your strong proclamation, unapologetic proclamation of faith in jesus christ. i listened to your opening statement and thought, wow. this is a guy who is willing to stand up in today's culture and say the first thing is first, faith in jesus christ. i was reminded of what christ said in matthew, seek ye first the kingdom of god and his righteousness and these things shall be added unto you. you will have a great future as our secretary and i look forward to that day happening.

you mentioned and it got rather dismissed, pivoted as a lot of things to do. you mentioned you were not able to serve with your national guard unit in protection of the inauguration of joe biden because of a christian tattoo. can you elaborate on what is this very offensive extremist, racist tattoo that you have? mr. hegseth: it is a tattoo that i have right here called the jerusalem cross. it is a historic christian symbol. interestingly, recently i attended briefly the memorial ceremony of former president jimmy carter on the floor of our natural -- national cathedral. on the front page of his program was the very same jerusalem cross. it is a christian religious symbol. when events happened preceding the biden inauguration, i was

part of the mobilization to defend that inauguration as someone who had been a proud supporter of donald trump but also a member of the military. i had orders to come to washington, d.c. to guard the inauguration and at the last minute those orders were revoked. i have never had orders revoked before. i have had orders to do a lot of dangerous things. they were revoked and i was not told why. later when i wrote my book i was able to get information and it was because i had been identified. someone who had served in iraq and afghanistan and guantanamo bay holding a riot shield outside of the white house, i had been identified as an extremist, someone unworthy of guarding the inauguration of an incoming american president. if that is happening to me, senator, how many other men and women, how many other patriots, how many other people of conscious? we have not even talked about covid. tens of thousands of service

members who were kicked out because of an experimental vaccine. in president trump's defense department, they will be apologized too, reinstituted with pay and rank. things like focusing on extremism, senator, have created a climate inside of our ranks that feel political when it has not ever been political. those are the types of things that will change and senator sullivan, you mentioned that study. after a study was held, extremism working group study, 100 extremists were identified in the ranks of 3 million. most of those were gang related. it was a made up boogie man to begin with. >> you are not the extremist. the people who would deny you your expression of faith are the extremists. they are the racists. they are the biggest. -- they are the bigots. i want to go to your opening statement. you said, "leaders at all levels

will be held accountable and war fighting and lethality and the readiness of the troops and their families will be our only focus." at that moment in my minds eye i heard soldiers, airmen, marines, sailors, guardians from the pentagon to the pacific and everywhere in between applaud. they are thinking, it is about time. i can get on board with that idea. quite honestly, it is so important. i don't know, just about everyone. i'm trying to think of an exception to this. that has ever come before this committee, that i have been on tours with, that wear the uniform whether it is with four stars or no stars, agrees with that statement. i want to caution you and i would be interested in your

feedback on this. there has been a lot of talk about firing generals, creating the purge group and all the things we have talked about. i would say give those men and women a chance under new leadership who i favor painting in the rotunda -- my favorite painting in the rotunda is george washington and his commission. a man who could have been keying chose to be a civilian leader of this country. i encourage you to trust them first and look forward to them saluting the civilian leadership of this country. just maybe if you could spend a minute elaborating a little bit about the wokeness, where it comes from and who will be held accountable. mr. hegseth: the wokeness comes from the political class. on january 20 when president trump is sworn in he will issue a new set of lawful orders and

the leadership will have the opportunity to follow those orders or not. those orders will not be based on politics. they will be based on readiness, accountability and lethality. that is the process by which leaders will be judged. accountability is coming because everybody in this room knows if you are a rifle man and you lose your rifle, they are throwing the book at you. but if you are a general who loses a war, you get a promotion. that is not going to happen in donald trump's pentagon. there will be real standards for success. everyone from the top from most senior general to the most lowly private will ensure that they are treated fairly in that system. >> i want to commend you for your answers to senator fischer's questions about nuclear deterrence. i also appreciate the fact that you emphasize reputational deterrence because deterrence is not a weapon system. it is an attitude and you project an attitude of

deterrence. thank you. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator king. >> thank you. mr. hegseth, welcome to the committee. you have made several references to your religion today. i share that devotion to christianity. i must say i have been reminded somewhat of saul on his way to damascus. you seem to have been converted in the last several weeks and months. you wrote in your book just last evident if we are going to send our boys to fight, and it should be boys, we need to unleash them >> we are going to leave this here. you can continue watching on c-span3. more on the c-span now video app. now we take to you the house of representatives as it gavels in this morning. live here on c-span. . the prayer will be offered by chaplain kibben. chaplain kibben: would you pray with