the civilian leadership has not built the department of defense to meet the moment. this is our moment to correct that. a few examples illustrate how leaders in the past have fallen short. most of the department's signature programs run billions of dollars over cost. vital initiatives have suffered such as the f-35, the new sentinel icbm, the navy's shipbuilding program and the constellation cass forget -- class frigate. they need leaders who listen to the advice of combat commanders, many of whom would benefit from innovative systems. yet a risk-averse dod culture has kept too many promising technologies on the wrong side of the so-called valley of death. that tenuous period between extreme rental prototypes and cut -- experiment of prototypes and contracts. as we all know, the pentagon cannot even pass an audit. the department must simplify and streamline its bureaucracy so we can respond to innovation. staffs have ballooned. organizations are top-heavy. civilian leaders have promised time and again to slim down the bureaucracy and generally hoped to. every day minu

defense following the horrific attacks of october 7, 2023. he showed a profound and personal commitment to the department of defense and a deep respect and concerns and their families, which resulted in an enabled critical efforts to take care of america's military community. as commander in chief, president biden believed in and invested in the united states military, securing historic funding for the department of defense to ensure the united states will have the capabilities that it needs to defend itself and lead far into the future. his extraordinary leadership left america safer and will ensure the united states military remains the strongest fighting force on earth. the distinctive accomplishments of president biden reflect great credit upon himself, the department of defense, and the united states of america. [applause] >> the distinguished public service medal is being awarded to dr. jill biden. dr. jill biden is recognized for distinguished public service in support of members of the united states armed forces from january 2021 to january 2025. as the first lady of the united states of america, dr. biden brought a lifetime of personal

hegseth this week, who will be fired at the department of defense next week? and i doubt very seriously it will be based upon merit or anything else other than a political agenda. and that would be the beginning of the unraveling of the core element of our military. it is not political. it serves neither party nor person. it protects and defends the constitution of the united states. and if we lose that, we will have lost something that is, i think, the key to our success not only as a military force, but as a nation. despite mr. hegseth's comment, the united states military is already one of the finest meritocracies in the world. every member of the military is in their position because of their ability. they are chosen by boards of other senior officers who evaluate their performance, who look closely at what they've done, and render their best professional position of the capability of that person to move on and assume a particular job. every member of the military is in their position because of their ability. when there's always a possibility that you need

recommend the department of defense. we see this cycle continuing on. host: what are some examples of that, that you would see? guest: more money going to the department of defense and then more money to those think tanks. host: which think tanks are you referring to? guest: we really see this at just about any think tank the department of defense is funding. they have service members who go on staff at these think tanks and publish research. you really see across the board from top organizations like brookings, wilson center, any of those think tanks that are funded. there are questions about whether u.s. taxpayer dollars should be going to think tanks that are effectively lobbying the federal government. host: the department of defense the agency that gives the most to think tanks. homeland security, and so on down the line. all of this information available if you want to scroll through it yourself or call in with questions about it. this is alex up first in minnesota, independent. you are on. caller: thanks for taking

emhoff, department of defense leadership, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen. dents. as secretary of defense, i have seen this and i've seen his leadership up close. he took the oath of office as america faced a moment of great challenge, the covid pandemic was raging and our allies and partners feared that america had lost its way. president biden helped america and the world recover from the pandemic. and he renewed american leadership around the planet. president biden dramatically strengthened our unmatched global network of allies and partners. he rallied the free world to help ukraine fight for its freedom after putin's indefensible invasion. he positioned america to succeed in strategic competition with the people's republic of china. he orchestrated a new convergence in the indo-pacific around a shared vision of security, openness, and prosperity. he reinforced nato, which is now larger, stronger, and more united than ever. he shored up israel's security after the vial october 7 terrorist assault by hamas. he helped defend israel from outrageous direct a

again, injecting politics into the department of defense will fail. night a second round of questioning although we need that time and i should point out historically went to secretary hagel was here we had two rounds of questioning. when secretary carter was here we had two rounds ofr questioning. so the precedent was strongly in favor. we have essentially been denied the kind of access that whatever revealed more of mr. hegseth qualities, conduct, and thoughts. and that is not appropriate. as i've said previously the fbi background check was an adequate. the first time i've ever had a background check supplemented by two additional addendum to the background check. that's not the way i have experienced it. so i hope my colleagues have asked themselves as this individual have the character and the confidence and the composure to be secretary of defense? i frankly am not convinced. and the lack of scrutiny which too many of my colleagues are using to consider this nomination. thesa lives of thousands and thousands of men and women in uniform for the se

the civilian leadership is not built the department of defense to meet the moment. is is our moment to correct that. a few examples illustrate how leaders in the past have fallen short. most of the department's signature programs run years behind schedule and billions of dollars over cost. vital initiatives have suffered, such as the new sentinel icbm and navy shipbuilding program, including the constellation class frigate. the department of defense desperately need civilian leaders who listen to the vice of combatant commanders, many of whom would benefit from innovative systems. yet, a risk-averse dod culture has kept too many promising technologies on the wrong side of the so-called valley of death. that tenuous period between experimental prototypes and production contracts. defense companies backed by venture capital receive less than 1% of defense contracts. as we know, the pentagon still cannot pass an audit. the department must simplify and streamline its bureaucracies so that it can respond to innovation. staffs have ballooned. organizations are top-heavy. c

bill, you and i talked about how the department of defense, the department of navy can't build ships anymore. they are focused more on climate change than ship building. that is the change agent that we need. i think his opening statement will be really strong and i'm looking forward to this hearing. it will be important. >> bill: democrats will put up a fight. chuck schumer describing how that might go. >> there are a lot of very, very troubling questions about the hegseth nomination and at the hearings our democratic side is going to question just about all of these troubling aspects. he is a nominee that comes with a lot of baggage. >> bill: senator, does he have the votes for confirmation? >> i think he has the votes. republicans are united on peace through strength, rebuilding our military. remember, bill, term, obama cut defense spending by 25%. crushed military readiness and president trump came in working with republican senators and we rebuilt the military. joe biden has done the same thing, four years in a row despite a very dangerous world joe biden has put forward inflati

i've been conducting rigorous oversight at the department of defense, along with other defense departmentssince i became a member of congress. this has led me to sound the alarm time and again about the lack of internal controls, price gouging and mismanagement of the taxpayer dollars. if confirmed, pete hegseth, president trump's secretary of defense nominee, will be the 16th secretary of defense to lead the department during my tenure in this chamber. when i met with mr. hegseth, i told him what i told all cabinet nominees that i meet with. when asked if you will respond to letters from members of congress, instead of saying yes, you ought to say maybe so you won't be made a liar later when you don't answer those letters. because, as we all know here in the senate, there's not a nominee that comes before any committee in the united states senate that doesn't firmly promise to answer all of our letters or come and testify or take our phone calls. so everyone says yes when seeking confirmation and most don't respond when they get into office. mr. hegseth said yes to the answer to that ques

department of justice who doesn't line up with his particular political view of the world. and pete hegseth seems to be of the same mind. he seems to be proposing, creating a department of defensethat abandons its core values and its traditional review processes in favor of a new culture of paranoia and mistrust amidst unexplained firings for even being perceived as having the wrong political leanings. now, this didn't happen inside the department of defense, but it's the highest profile firing in the national security chain of command. on monday on trump's first day in office, he fired the head of the coast guard, commandant linda fagan, without explanation. beyond annan must statements to the -- beyond anonymous statements to the press about vague concerns about fagan's approach to programs aimed at improving diversity or opportunity within the coast guard. many of us have had the opportunity to work with admiral fagan. she is a straight shooter. she improved morale at the coast. she has vigorously defended our shores. she has helped increase readiness. there is nothing political, there was nothing political about linda fagan and her career of service to this country, to beco

of defense? the department of defense has failed seven you aed idz in -- audits in a row. the secretary of defense must be able to get the department on track to pass an audit. it's mandated by congress. it's been mandated -- mandated before and they still fail year after year. but both sides say it should happen. we should put some teeth into that. but i'll tell you, putting a man who can't manage a tiny nonprofit isn't going to get the job done. they ran up enormous debt, and by 2008, the financial records show they were unable to pay their creditors. irresponsible in the max. now, i know running a small nonprofit is hard. i was the director of an affiliate of habitat for humanity and i was president of the world affairs council and had managerial responsibilities and it was tough making sure we hit payroll each month, making sure that we reached the aspirations we had for those organization. it was hard work. i worried about it all the time, but we always met payroll. we always advanced in our mission. maybe, if we're going to hire somebody from a small nonprofit to run

the department of defense has a slew of issues as it pertains to not being able to account for budget. the department of defense has issues as it pertains to hypersonic missiles. so so let's not let veterans. >> organizations into. >> the ground. let's not pretend that the department of defense is this beacon of successful departments. >> in the united. >> states government. it is not. >> i if you want me to be honest about department of defense, let's be honest about hegseth. he ran veterans organizations into the ground. he got fired. that's enough. i must say, that's enough. why would you put him in charge of the. >> biggest budget? wait a minute. >> no, no. hang on. >> go ahead. >> what does it say? >> that senator mcconnell, though, clearly agrees. i mean, senator mcconnell is no shrinking violet and clearly not some democrat. eric trump is. >> tweeting to lose. >> eric trump is tweeting senator mcconnell's the worst because he voted no on this. he is not the one who takes defense issues lightly. he is someone who believes that ukraine should continue to get us support. i mean, t

are you familiar with the women, peace and security agenda at the department of defense? >> yes, ma'am, i am. >> this is a law that was signed during president elect trump's first term. it was legislation that i sponsored with republican senator capito of west virginia. it was co-sponsored by marco rubio, the nominee to be the president elect's secretary of state. it was led in the house of representatives by kristi noem, the president elect's nominee to be the secretary of homeland security. it mandates that women be included in all aspects of our national security, including conflict resolution and peace negotiations. and at the department of defense. it has been the law for eight years under both the trump and biden administrations. the dod has incorporated women throughout its decision making. and as a result, every single combatant commander across two administrations has told this committee that this law and its implementation at the department of defense provides them a strategic advantage operationally. based on your comments, it appears that the example that you w

the civilian leadership has not built the department of defense to meet the moment. and this is our moment to correct that. a few examples illustrate how leaders in the past have fallen short. most of the department's signature programs run years behind schedule, and billions of dollars over cost. vital initiatives have suffered, such as the f-35, the new sentinel icbm, and the navy's shipbuilding program, including the constellation class frigate. the department of defense desperately needs civilian leaders who listen to the advice of combatant commanders, many of whom would benefit from innovative systems. yet a risk averse dod culture has kept too many promising technologies on the wrong side of the so-called valley of death. that tenuous period between experimental prototypes and production contracts. defense companies backed by venture capital receive less than 1% of defense contracts. as we all know, the pentagon still cannot even pass an audit. the department must simplify and streamline its bureaucracy so it can respond to. innovation. staffs have ballooned. o

that isn't the kind of fiscal management we want at the department of defense. we can't tolerate it at the department of defense. that's an organization with a budget of $850 billion. not ten or 15 million, which was the case at those two organizations. and it has command 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? >> senator, i would like an opportunity to respond to the impugning of that organization. concerning veterans of america. i appreciate your service on the v.a. committee. the v.a. accountability act and the mission act were all brain childs of concerned veit veterans for america. used donor money focused to create policy that better evidence the lives of veterans. >> i'm asking you a very simple question. how many men and women currently serve in the united states arm eave? >> the united states army, 450,000 on active duty. >> how many in the navy? >> navy is 425, sir. >> 337 this year. how many i

that isn't the kind of fiscal management we want at the department of defense. we can't tolerate it at the department of defense. that's an organization with a budget of $850 billion, not 10 or 15 million, which was the case that those two organizations and it has command 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? what is the end strength? >> senator, i would like an opportunity to respond to well, i'm impugning of my leadership of a veterans organization, concerned veterans for america. you're on the va committee, sir, and i appreciate your service there. the va accountability act and the mission act were all 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'm asking you a very simple question. how many men and women currently serve in the united states army? >> senator, the united sta

to lead the department of defense and the change. ink he's going to be a major change agent to bring the department of defense back to his core mission of fighting and being prepared if necessary peer defeating and killing our enemies and under joe biden and the debet -- democrats the department of defense has run down every woke rabbit trail of whatever political agenda at the moment is instead of fighting the war fighter. and want to make a british and, when pete hegseth is confirmed as secretary of defense, we are going to see illicit numbers rise and rise dramatically because young and women who want to fight to defend the country they don't want to be part of some local mind experiment from the democrats, but they do want to be heroes defending america and that's what pete hegseth is fighting to defend and get us back to. >> jesse: he was inspiring today no doubt. what are some things most critical to tackle on day one if pete takes over the pentagon? >> looked the pentagon is a massive institution turning the battleship. i've sa

it will be submitted. >> are you familiar with the women, peace and security agenda at the department of defense? >> yes, ma'am, i am. >> a law signed during trump's first term. legislation that i sponsor evidence with republican senator capito of west virginia co-sponsor evidence by marco rubio and helped by kristi noem. it mandates that women be included in all aspects of our national security including conflict resolution and peace negotiations. at the department of defense it has been the law for eight years under both the trump and biden administrations, the dod has incorp rafted women throughout its decision making as a result. every single combatant commander across two administrations has told this committee and thaw this law price them a strategic advantage. based on your comments it appears the example you want to set not only for women in the country but across the globeo lead the most combat credible military in the entire world is that women should not have an equal opportunity in our military. so will you commit to preserving the women peace and security law at d.o.d. and including

and to change the department of defense. ink he is going to be a major change agent to bring the department of defense back to its core mission of supporting the war fighter, of being prepared, if necessary, to defeat and kill our enemies. and under joe biden and the democrats, the department of defense has run down every woke rabbit trail of whatever the political agenda of the moment is. instead of focusing on the war fighter, i'm going to make a prediction for you, jesse. when pete hegseth is confirmed as secretary of defense, we are going to see enlistment numbers rise and rise dramatically because young men and women who want to fight to defend the country, they don't want to be part of some woke mind experiment from the democrats, but they do want to be heroes defending america. and that's what pete hegseth is fighting to defend and get us back to. >> he was inspiring today. there's no doubt about that. what are the things that are the most critical to tackle on day one? if pete takes over the pentagon? >> look, the pen

day one executive order eliminating dei from the federal government and department of defense. k dei departments and of course in the private sector we have seen's can bike amazon and meta rolling back dei initiatives joining companies like target and lowe's and ford motors. they are very clearly a cultural shift that's taking place here away from lower standards and woke ideology toward individual success and merit and americans are breathing a sigh of relief as common sense is being restored in this country. >> todd: well, in response, costco is pretty clear defending these policies enterprise respect and inclusion. they are not going to back down from. this i am perplexed by costco of all companies would do this considering most of the costco customers that i know they are rural and suburban trump voters. these are not elites where they don't even have costcos. why would they basically in effect bud light themselves when they have had ample warning that this is coming and the american people don't want dei anymore? it's clear that dei is divisive. it is toxic. the american pe

hegseth this week, who will be fired at the department of defense next week? and i doubt very seriously it will be based upon merit or anything else other than a political agenda. and that would be the beginning of the unraveling of the core element of our military. it is not political. it serves neither party nor person. it protects and defends the constitution of the united states. and if we lose that, we will have lost something that is, i think, the key to our success not only as a military force, but as a nation. despite mr. hegseth's comment, the united states military is already one of the finest meritocracies in the world. every member of the military is in their position because of their ability. they are chosen by boards of other senior officers who evaluate their performance, who look closely at what they've done, and render their best professional position of the capability of that person to move on and assume a particular job. every member of the military is in their position because of their ability. when there's always a possibility that you need

>> it's a lot of folks who don't have much experience with the pentagon, with the defense department.f you folks who have done defense contracting jobs but a lot of folks were coming in with business experience rather than military experience. so again, we'd be looking at some level a shakeup in terms of what they are going to be focused on, are they going to understand the traditions and norms the military has run, or is it going to be this idea of running the pentagon more like a business which is always interesting when you talk about issues of national security and the scope and scale of what happens. host: i forget to mention active and former military. if you want to give your comments, (202) 748-8003 is the number you can cultivate those comments known. with different match on this hearing today. matt is in virginia, democrats line. caller: so i guess my question for the guest is looking back in the previous administration of donald trump, what was the secretary of defense doing to protect us from donald trump's excesses? he stopped them from using the military to go into citie

do you believe that you're going to be running the secretary or the department of defense by yourself, senator? >> absolutely not. just as president trump is assembling his cabinet. i look forward and already am, in the process of building one of the best possible teams you can imagine. with decades and decades of experience outside of the pentagon driving innovation and excellence, and also inside the building knowing how to make it happen. yes, sir. >> so in your organizations that you did have the privilege of running, did you have a board that you in both organizations? >> we had a board. >> yes. okay. and what what did you do with that board? what kind of decisions did you make with them? >> those boards provided oversight and insight into decision making. >> they all have special, unique sets that maybe filled gaps that you're not the expertise in. yes, sir. so do you believe you're capable of surrounding yourself with capable individuals, that you're going to be able to run those same ideas by and surround yourself with people that are smarter and better equipped, and maybe are

. >> run the department of defense. republicans can afford to lose three votes from their own party and still get hegseth across the finish line to confirmation by. >> the skin of his teeth. >> they would need jd vance to split the tie. but already, two republican senators have announced they will not vote to confirm hegseth. lisa murkowski of alaska. susan collins. >> of maine. >> today on. >> capitol hill, collins explained her no vote on hegseth to nbc news, and she went into damning. >> detail. >> i ended up. >> having a. >> number of concerns. >> they had to do with. >> his lack. of experience. in managing an. >> organization as. >> large and. >> as complex as the. >> pentagon. >> given that. >> he had had. >> a decidedly. >> mixed record in managing two very small. nonprofit veterans organizations where there were allegations of wasted. money and mismanagement, i was. disturbed about his comments on women in the military. when i asked him about that, he backtracked. but i did not find. it convincing because he. >>

in the department of defense as you just stated because of their status and affiliation to their military service. i have to refer you to the department of defense to speak to that. specifically i do not want to get into a back and forth on this. what we can say is continue to condemn any form of violence. do whatever we can continue to do the work to make sure there is a security protocol continues and we protect across the country. i am not going to dive into the two subjects. >> any reactio detail? >> the president calm his heartt is going out to the families who were certainly affected and lost a loved one. and, what he wants to do this team is going to continue to do theto work to make sure americas are protected. communities are protected and that's unwilling to speak to a pretty heard that from the president multiple times this week already. that's going to be the president's focus. >> president elect trump a little while ago today take issue with the fact. [inaudible] is there any potential? is that a decision the white house would consider that u.s. relationship is strong. what i

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

the secretary for the departed of defense. we watched the funeral of the 39th president. we see the military personnel, marine one and air force one at the white house and at the embassy overseas. if any of them would have had alcohol problems, they would never have taken that post. not counting the military personnel at the tomb of the unknown soldier. for 20 years, i served in the military and i would do it again. the president and the department of defense have to be above the rest of the people. and this guy, our national defense is in harm's way. because at any time, we have our in ami's out there knowing he has a drinking problem -- enemies out there, knowing he has a drinking problem. they can use that. this guy is not the person that we need serving as secretary of defense. my god, they could have found someone better. i was saying to our commission officer, this guy did what he had to do. there are people saying there is no racism in the military -- i went into the military in 1974. we couldn't do our job. we had to d

congressman robert garcia of california, and jeremy bash, former chief of staff at the cia and department of defensenk you both very much for coming back to have this conversation. jeremy, since you were at the department of defense, this concern about lone actors, but also lone actors who have military experience has been a concern for years. how concerned should we be about veterans who become lone actors? >> let's stipulate first most veterans are productive and law abiding members of society, but yes, there are instances where people who served in the military have certain training and capability we have to be concerned about if they become radicalized. the new orleans attacker joined the easiest club in the world to join, i.s.i.s. there are no requirements. he said, "i was radicalized by i.s.i.s. i joined i.s.i.s.," and he conducted this car ramming attack and had pretty sophisticated explosive devices, including with remote timers. this is of significant concern for law enforcement authorities. the next 16 days we'll have three national security special events, january 6th on monday, the carte

>> the fbi is continuing their taaminvestigation and the department of defense as you stated because of their status and affiliation to their military service, i would have to refer you to the department of defense to that specifically . i don't want to get into a back-and-forth on this. what we can say is continue to condemn any form of violence and do whatever we can and continue to do the work obviously to make sure that there is a security protocol continued and we protect americans and certainly communities across the country. i'm not going to dive into the two o. >> you stated if the president had any reaction when he was told that detail about both of these attacks. >> what i can say is the president, his heart is going out to the families that were affected and lost a loved one that day. and what he wants to do is make sure that his team is continuing to do the work to make sure that americans are protected, communities are protected and that's whati can you are that from the hepresident multiple times this week already . that's going to be the president's focus .>> president-

that character is the defining trait required of the secretary of defense and must be prioritized without compromise. the leader of the department of defense must demonstrate and model the standards of behavior and character we expect of all servicemembers. and mr. hegseth's nomination to the role poses significant concerns that i cannot overlook given the global security environment we're operating in, it is critical that we confirm a secretary of defense. however, i regret that i am unable to support mr. hegseth. end quote. what a powerfully damning stat statement, not damning necessarily mr. hegseth as a human being. i respect his service. i said at the hearing that i was grateful and respectful of his service to our nation, including leading troops in combat and advocating for veterans. but these concerns about his personal background and about his lack of experience negate that respect for his service as a secretary of defense, as a secretary of defense. we are not choosing him to be a colonel, to be promoted. we're choosing him to lead the entire united states military and to make decisions that will be a matter of life-or

department of justice. he has spent his career at the department of defense, department of state, and at the national security council. we thank all of you federal being here today. we will now begin with opening statements. i know you have submitted written statements as well. and thank you for that. if you'll please adhere to the five-minute summary of your statements. we'll start with mr. jones. you're now recognized. >> thank you, chairman. good afternoon, chairman pfluger, chair gimenez, and distinguished subcommittee. it's an honor to be here to discuss the authorities and capabilities dedicated to threats countered and imposed by malicious use of unmanned air systems, commonly caw l caughted uas or drones. with my 30 years, i've witnessed national malicious actors to circumvent law enforcement. recent years, i've devoted significant time to understanding the threat to border security and coordinating cvp's response. air and marine is cvp. we work alongside field counter parts to detect, track and mitigate the threat along our borders. we also cooperate with doj and fbi partners in investigation. along

after today's briefing, he ordered the fire department of defense or the department of defense to provideitional fire fighting personnel and capabilities. now the department is sending ten navy helicopters with the water delivery buckets to immediately assist the aerial suppression. biden says resources from the federal government are here to stay. >> it is going to take time. the government is here to stay as long as you need us and everything you need. that is quite the contrary. and first of all, that major disaster that they approved next level of appreciation on behalf of all the residents here in southern california. >>> meanwhile president-elect trump is taking aim at newsom where he argues newsom should have declared and signed a declaration to pump more water through california to prevent the situation. >>> we'll continue to follow these devastating fires on air and online for updates any time. head to kpix.com or download the free cbs news app. >>> up next, a man involved in a deadly shooting in the middle of the quiet eastbound community will not face charges. why prosecutors s

joining me now, jeremy bash, former chief of staff at the cia and department of defense during the obama administration, and lindsey, presidential historian, executive director of the george washington presidential library and coed or the of mourning the presidents: loss and legacy in american culture. thank you both very much for coming to "the saturday show." so jeremy, since i focused intently on president carter's international legacy, i'm going to begin with you. because this connection between the camp david accords and what was believed to about to happen between israel and saudi arabia, you put that connection -- you brought that connection to me just over the weekend. talk about how the camp david accords was the template for what could have been with saudi arabia. >> well, president carter brokered in the late 1970s, it wasn't just a peace deal between israel and egypt, its sworn enemy, it was a three-way deal in which the united states also played an integral role, guaranteeing military and chick assistance for these two important partners in the region. it was a three-way dea

you know, that is about 51,560 times fewer, lower than the department of defense budget of $825 billion. $16 million is 51,568 times smaller than the defense budget. please describe to me, mr. hegseth, you talk about dod passing an audit, please describe to me a time or an organization when you that you led underwent an audit because you said you're going to hire smarter people than you >> oh, did you add an odd and the way that's should be the not 18, yes or no completely missed. can't answer this yes or no? >> did you lead an audit? do you not know this answer? senator, yes or no? my leadership of these organizations. yes or no? misrepresented. i will take that as a no. what were the findings? so there were no findings. you've never led an audit. what guidance did you give the auditors? none. because you've never led an audit. nobody expects you to be an accountant, mr. hegseth. what we expect is for you to understand the complexity of this pentagon budget process. that is absolutely necessary to outfit our war fighters. look, the secretary of defense is required to make quick decisio

and tammy duckworth says this man is not qualified to run appleby's, let alone department of defense.fied people for health care and other things that had nothing to do with people. look at secretary of health and human services, a lawyer put in charge of healthcare and lost every legal case in front of supreme court. talk about unqualified and they pull this nonsense. he knows his military stuff. when i was talking about contracting and making ourselves efficient and lethal, he understands what he doesn't have spshlt in and knows who to hire and how to shore up what he thinks his weak spots are and how to learn on the job. he is very intelligent and will do a great job. >> todd: would you be excited to sign up and fight under pete hegseth? >> absolutely. and that is what matters. my sons could fight under him and that would be great. >> todd: folks in house of representatives do something about it. new study by national association of manufacturers show six million american jobs at stake, 540 billion in lost wages and gdp shortfall, are you close to working out internal disagreement

this is the most important cabinet secretary trump will have on his team at the department of defense to get our military focused. we need someone like pete to clean up the mess, make the military strong again, fix issues. >> brian: getting spending straight and spending up because of rising the threat of china and eastern europe. part of the reason him and roger wicker hit it off, he did a comprehensive look prior to trump winning. wicker said, i heard enough, he gets it. >> lawrence: don't be surprised if john fetterman votes for him. he said he finds the senator doing interest ing and he is no rh right or left, he's in the middle. when the allegations come up, they will probably use a female senator to drive that message. pete was never arrested, the investigation went away, they did not find he did anything. if you want to submit record of people's allegations, we can do the same thing for people and members of congress that have allegations against them, you have to prove in court of law. should not be discourse in a committee meeting. >> steve: 9:30 this morning, hegseth confirm

the advice and wisdom and guidance -- i look forward to working with all of you and other senators to make sure the defense department has would it needs and our nation has would it needs and is prepared to defend. to my amazing staff who has been with us this entire process, i see so many of you drew thick and thin -- we should look at the betting odds every once in a while. we defied the odds and there were so many folks on the inside and allies on the outside and we are eternally grateful. i want to thank the war fighters. i want to thank men and women that wear the uniform. and i've said this before when i speak and i mean it -- every time i stand at a podium under the bright lights and cameras, the first thing that goes through my head are the guys that i served with on the battlefield. the men and women who i locked shields with and put my life on the line with. they will never get the spotlight, they have never had the cameras and people don't know what they did in dark and dangerous places. but i know. and at the pentagon we will remember them and think about those warriors with every single decision that we

you know, that is about 51,560 times fewer, lower than the department of defense budget of $825 billion. $16 million is 51,568 times smaller than the defense budget. please describe to me, mr. hegseth, you talk about dod passing an audit. please describe to me a time or an organization when you -- that you led underwent an audit. you say you're going to hire smarter people than you to run the audit. i'm not asking you to be an accountants. i want you to be able to tell me what guidance will be given to the employees, what will happen whether or not you pass that audit, have you led an audit of any organization, yes or no? i don't want a long answer. yes or no, have you led an audit of any organization of which you are in charge. >> senator, in both of the organizations i ran, we were always completely fiscally responsible -- >> yes or no did you lead an awed yit? audit? what are you afraid of? you can't answer this question? yes or no did you lead an audit? don't you know? yes or no, did you lead an audit. i will take it as a no. what were the findings? no findings because you never led

they have sees our department of defense from the men and women who have the audacity to serve and wherethis country and they have tarnished the reputation. they have led to disasters in afghanistan, in ukraine, initial and elsewhere but they blame us. one of the main themes about government gangsters is we cannot take their bait. we cannot take the overcorrection approach they want to government. what we must do is identify that people in government that are crippling our constitutional republic. what does that mean? we have to identify them. it's not a republican or democratic thing. the people to start russia gate are back in power now. if you think in the following to be to use to prove with devin nunes, that a political party in the united states of america to go overseas to hijack the fbi go to a federal secret court and i to judge just to surveilled their political opponent, that's conspiracy stuff but that's what happened in our united states of america, to our present the first go round. what do you think these people are doing now? and there's no coincidences in government. ..