67

Summary

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has told Donald Trump that Pete Hegseth likely has enough votes to be confirmed as Defense Secretary, despite controversy over past sexual misconduct allegations, a financial settlement, and concerns about his leadership and alcohol use.

Hegseth’s confirmation hearing is set for Jan. 14, with Senate Republicans aiming to expedite key national security confirmations before Trump’s Jan. 20 inauguration.

Other high-profile hearings, including for Marco Rubio (State), Pam Bondi (Attorney General), and Tulsi Gabbard (DNI), are tentatively scheduled for the same week amidst ongoing bipartisan negotiations.

top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 38 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's transparent how "consent" is being manufactured here.

Prime the public early enough, and regardless of the level of outrage the news cycles will die down before confirmation. At that point the people who are outraged will predominantly be resigned, the bar will be lower, and the senators have cover to confirm.

It's the typical narcissist's boundary-pushing playbook. And it's still working fine for Trump going on eight decades.

[-] simplejack@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

This guy sucks, but IMHO, more energy should be spent on tanking people like Patel and RFK. They’re an even bigger threat to American citizens.

[-] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 10 points 2 days ago

They would need someone exactly like Hegseth when they go through with their plan to purge generals that would uphold the constitution and promote trump loyalists to more positions of power in the military. I'm sure there are some on Lemmy that assumes all military members are the same and pro-trump. That isn't true. There were generals going around and talking to their counterparts to make sure the military would not come if Trump called during 1/6.

This will make it so next time they will have more backing.

[-] itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Far-right Christo-Fascist White Supremacist Pete Hegseth vs Brain-Worm Conspiracy Nut RFK?

I think RFK isn’t smart enough to do enough real damage on a global scale. He just has some stupid ideas that will help insurance companies and the medical system make more money when people get sick from preventable diseases. More company profits.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

I would be more inclined to agree if we hadn't just come out of a global pandemic with bird flu doing its best to be round two.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

If it comes to that, Americans may have to use VPNs to read foreign news sources to get anything close to reliable on the state of things, too. Most of the "liberal media" here is already kowtowing to these guys and they haven't even assumed office yet. Imagine something like bird flu under these clowns and with a totally compliant media acting like North Korea's state media...

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Just look at how much death donvict caused during Covid. RFK could quite possibly kill far, far more. And this time, those impacted may very well be children.

He doesn't even need to ban vaccines outright to cause a lot of damage. That kind of insane idiocy coming from the very top might put just enough people off vaccination as to cause a serious clusterfuck.

Add Tulsi Gabbard who is either the most clueless useful idiot out there or (more likely) clearly working for Russia.

I think they're all bad enough to fundamentally and permanently damage democracy in the US, so it's good not to "prioritize" in this case. Hegseth can enable Trump to use our actual armed forces to enforce whatever whim he has, which is about as scary as you can get. They all need to be prevented from taking their roles.

[-] bizzle@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

I wish that we only had people in our government that took it seriously and didn't actively hate our population.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

Well, he promised he would stop drinking during work hours, so it's probably fine.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

Such a major indictment of the Republican Senate majority and their complete subservience to the Orange Jesus in installing the least qualified and most unfit person ever to be nominated for the top Pentagon job.

[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

I wonder how many Democrats will be joining these shit Republicans in putting this completely unqualified and sexual abuser into a leadership position?

[-] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip -3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

sdklf;gjkl;dsgjkl;dsgjkl;dsgsjkl;g

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 8 points 2 days ago

Fuck that. Fight even if you're going to loose because it literally costs them nothing to fight it.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 1 points 2 days ago

Hot take: the Venn Diagram of people saying fighting is a waste of political capital and those saying people who didn't vote for Harris consented to Trump's agenda is a perfect circle.

[-] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

sdklf;gjkl;dsgjkl;dsgjkl;dsgsjkl;g

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 3 points 2 days ago

Was fighting the Brett Kavanaugh appointment a waste of political capital?

[-] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

sdklf;gjkl;dsgjkl;dsgjkl;dsgsjkl;g

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 2 points 2 days ago

If effort is the only cost, then yes. If political capital in the form of bipartisan goodwill is your concern, they should not have fought Kavanaugh or any appointment where the odds aren't better than a coin toss.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Voting against this clown doesn't burn any political capital for a Democrat.

[-] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

sdklf;gjkl;dsgjkl;dsgjkl;dsgsjkl;g

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

If they don't fight then appointments like this get normalized.

[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

If the Republicans have the votes to get this alcoholic, unqualified, sexual deviant into the position then fine, let them do it on their own.

It would be absolutely stupid for any Democrat to cast a single vote for those or any other unqualified Trump appointee AMD sets the tone for being capitulating jackasses that will continue to lose their base.

[-] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip -2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

sdklf;gjkl;dsgjkl;dsgjkl;dsgsjkl;g

[-] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 days ago

It helps set the record for what your elected representatives are doing.

Unfortunately, nowadays most Democrats agree with Republican positions

[-] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

sdklf;gjkl;dsgjkl;dsgjkl;dsgsjkl;g

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Aren't all those things just prereqs?

this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2025
67 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19292 readers
1698 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS