Some important things to know about Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of defense: He claims he hasn’t washed his hands in a decade, he vowed to “send back” his Harvard master’s degree, and he has a gig as weekend on-air talent on Fox News.
Conservatives vying to win favor with MAGA world have already begun spinning this Trump Cabinet selection as a home-run pick. Trump’s communications director recently defended Hegseth after reports surfaced of a 2017 sexual assault allegation, insisting he is “extremely qualified” for the role. (Authorities cited a police report for “an alleged sexual assault;” Hegseth did not face charges, and his attorney denied the allegations, according to NBC News). But much like Hegseth’s handwashing claims, they are almost certainly lying to themselves and their audience about his qualification for a role in the administration, presumably to win favor with Trump and his cadre of sycophants.
Eight additional years spent at Fox News has not made him any more qualified to run the Department of Defense.
Upon a close review of Hegseth’s qualifications, I think he was likely chosen because he seems willing to say and do anything Trump wants, has expressed favorable views on war crimes, and because Trump thinks he looks and sounds good on TV. Unfortunately, these Trump-friendly qualities also position him as perhaps one of the least qualified picks for secretary of defense we’ve seen.
I should know because in 2016, I vetted Hegseth while working at the Republican National Committee (RNC), when Trump’s team was considering him for under secretary roles at the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs.
According to my professional assessment at the time, Hegseth was unqualified for the more junior positions he was being considered for in 2016, and eight additional years spent at Fox News has not made him any more qualified to run the Department of Defense, an organization with 2 million employees, and one that regularly interacts with foreign military leaders and is critical to our national security and global standing.
My job at the RNC was that of a national senior opposition researcher. I created opposition research and vetting “books,” along with media plans and narratives on my issues — health care, foreign affairs, national security, and veterans affairs — for the day, week, and month ahead, and then implemented these plans and narratives through direct outreach to journalists or by providing the talking points to TV hosts or surrogates.
We worked seven days a week, regularly topping 100 hours, with our weekdays starting off on calls coordinating the RNC’s work with the Trump campaign’s daily agenda. The calls were interesting to say the least as they were led by Sean Spicer on the RNC side, and had a rotating cast of Trump campaign officials on the other end — ranging from the likes of Paul Manafort, who was convicted on five felony counts of tax fraud, and additional counts of failure to file a report of foreign bank and financial accounts and bank fraud, to Corey Lewandowski, accused in the past, among other things, of misdemeanor battery (Lewandoski denied the claim and authorities dropped the charges citing inadequate evidence) and sexual harassment (Lewandowski’s lawyer denied the claim and charges were dropped), and who always sounded like he had far too many red bulls (to put it kindly) in his system for an early morning call.
After the 2016 election, our work turned from manipulating the media into vetting Trump administration hopefuls.
Many people probably think that vetting a candidate for an administration entails private investigators and all types of “off the books” work. That is not the case. Instead, it requires scouring the public domain for available information, and then using it to craft a powerful story. If the researcher thinks someone is unqualified, they create a book as damaging as possible, like this one I created on Rudy Giuliani when he was being considered for secretary of state. Politically speaking, Giuliani’s past work with a group formerly designated by the State Department as terrorists was bad, but he also worked with Purdue Pharma, who many blame for creating the opioid crisis, and helped secure a deal that helped avoid legal and regulatory scrutiny during the height of said crisis.
So, what did we find on Hegseth? Let’s start with the good. He has impressive academic credentials, a Princeton bachelor’s degree and a Harvard master’s degree, and is a decorated military veteran, having served as an officer and earned two Bronze Stars, among other commendations.
The other experience Hegseth does have … is not great, from the public office perspective especially. His foray into finance didn’t yield much of promise; he was an equity markets analyst for Bear Stearns from 2004-2006 preceding the firm’s infamous collapse as part of the 2008 Great Recession. Okay, I thought. Maybe money just isn’t his thing.
How about foreign policy?
Not Pete’s thing either — unless we count stints at two comically partisan think tanks focused on conservative social values and monetary policy (cutting taxes for billionaires) — Chris Rufo’s Manhattan Institute or the even more obscure Center of the American Experiment.
Surely Hegseth at least has experience running a massive organization, like that of which Rex Tillerson brought to the State Department? Nope — he was CEO of a small non-profit that has between 11-50 employees.
The potential new secretary of defense has no experience running a large organization, lacks foreign policy experience, and has never worked in a meaningful way with Congress to pass billions in military budgets.
To summarize, the potential new secretary of defense has no experience running a large organization, lacks foreign policy experience, and has never worked in a meaningful way with Congress to pass billions in military budgets.
But what Hegseth lacks in experience he makes up in dangerous partisan rhetoric, having worked at such venerated journalistic institutions as Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze,” and more recently, Fox News.
And that, I believe, is why Trump picked Hegseth. Because he represents an empty vessel that sounds and acts tough on TV. It’s not hard to imagine that he would do and say whatever Trump wants. And considering that known interventionist Marco Rubio will likely be the next secretary of state, and China hawk and former defense contractor Mike Waltz has been picked for national security advisor, it’s time to put to bed the notion that Trump is anti-interventionist, and prepare ourselves for the very real possibility of a new American conflict started by team Trump. Again, it’s somewhat easy to see why Trump may have picked Hegseth for the role; but none of it bodes well for the next four years.
