Eric Hoffer’s admonition applies in spades to Pete Hegseth
Ah, the dizzying power of self-delusion.
Peter B. “Pete” Hegseth, the former Fox TV host and much tattooed ex-Army National Guard major, styles himself as the “Secretary of War,” even though his official title until Congress decides otherwise is “Secretary of Defense.” Thrice-married, he is fond of looking macho and has buttressed his studly image by paying $50,000 to quash a sexual-assault claim. He also warms to photo-ops of himself doing push-ups with American troops in the snow.
But, lately, Hegseth is adding some big smudges to his escutcheon, even as he seems — or pretends — to be blind to them.
Most recently, of course, is the report by the Defense Department’s Office of Inspector General about how he used a chat app, Signal, to share advance details about a forthcoming bombing operation in Yemen in March. The IG determined that Hegseth “created a risk to operational security that could have resulted in failed U.S. mission objectives and potential harm to U.S. pilots.” In several sections of that heavily redacted report, the IG drove home that point.
“The Secretary sent nonpublic DoD information identifying the quantity and strike times of manned U.S. aircraft over hostile territory over an unapproved, unsecure network approximately 2 to 4 hours before the execution of those strikes,” the IG report said. “Using a personal cell phone to conduct official business and send nonpublic DoD information through Signal risks potential compromise of sensitive DoD information, which could cause harm to DoD personnel and mission objectives.”
Remember that this all came to light because Jeffrey Goldberg, editor of The Atlantic, had been added to the Hegseth chat inadvertently. That alone was an astonishing breach of security.
“Signalgate became a shorthand for ineptitude at the highest reaches of the administration,” the magazine recalled in a fresh report. “Foreign allies told us that they felt justified in their earlier reluctance to share their secrets with the United States, given President Donald Trump’s long history of mishandling classified information.”
The IG blasted Hegseth, too, for using his unclassified personal device to share sensitive information via group chat to other top Trump administration officials and for not preserving all associated messages, in violation of federal recordkeeping laws. Notably, he refused to talk with the IG and refused to turn over his phone.
And yet, Hegseth’s public response was, essentially, “no harm, no foul.” His exact words on X were: “No classified information. Total exoneration. Case closed. Houthis bombed into submission. Thank you for your attention to this IG report.”
And, as The Washington Post reported, Hegseth’s spokesman, Sean Parnell, said in a statement that the review was a “TOTAL exoneration of Secretary Hegseth and proves what we all knew — no classified information was shared.” Parnell added: “This matter is resolved and the case is closed.”
It’s one thing for a flack to serve up steaming BS. But one has to wonder whether Hegseth, a Princeton graduate with a postgrad degree from Harvard, can read. Or, as so often seems the case with his master and benefactor, Donald J. Trump, perhaps he just believes he can lie and people will believe it.
Falling in line, other Trumpists seem to be taking the same tack with Hegseth’s early September missile attacks on an alleged drug boat. Those hits killed two men who were struggling in the water after an initial strike, beyond the others initially blown apart.
After watching videos of the hits, Republican Sen. Tom Cotton said: “The first strike, the second strike, and the third and the fourth strike on September 2nd were entirely lawful and needful, and they were exactly what we would expect our military commanders to do.” And Rep. Rick Crawford (R-Arkansas), who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, added that there was “no doubt in my mind about the highly professional manner” in which the attack occurred.
Adm. Frank M. Bradley, who ordered the missile strikes as he followed Hegseth’s commands, considered the survivors to be viable targets, not shipwrecked, defenseless mariners who, by law, should not have been targeted, according to The Washington Post. The pair could have radioed for help and continued their “mission” of shipping drugs to American shores, Cotton told the paper.
Really? Ah, the power of self-delusion. Certainly, Democrats who viewed the videos saw something quite different.
Rep. Jim Himes (Connecticut), the House Intelligence Committee’s top Democrat, described the footage as “one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service.” The survivors, he said, were “in clear distress” after their boat was “destroyed.”
“The video we saw today showed two shipwrecked individuals who had no means to move, much less pose an immediate threat, and yet they were killed by the United States military,” Himes said in a joint statement with Rep. Adam Smith (Washington), the House Armed Services Committee’s top Democrat. “Regardless of what one believes about the legal underpinnings of these operations, and we have been clear we believe they are highly questionable, this was wrong.”
Hegseth has tried to distance himself from the strikes that killed the survivors, backhandedly praising Bradley’s decision for sending the missiles that followed the first one. That compliment nicely sets the admiral up as a fall guy. And the admiral, perhaps falling on his sword, has reportedly denied a Washington Post report that claimed that Hegseth ordered the military to “kill them all.”
That Washington Post report — confirmed by an anonymous source separately to NPR — was that Hegseth gave a spoken directive to kill the surviving occupants of the boat with a second strike. Attacking “wounded, sick or shipwrecked” combatants violates the law of war, according to a Pentagon manual.
Hegseth denied those reports as “fabricated, inflammatory and derogatory,” saying U.S. operations in the Caribbean are “lawful under both U.S. and international law … and approved by the best military and civilian lawyers, up and down the chain of command.”
Recall, though, that Hegseth drove out an earlier area commander who appears to have had reservations about the boat attacks. Adm. Alvin Holsey announced his premature resignation as head of military operations in the Caribbean after raising concerns about the legality of lethal strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean, The Wall Street Journal reported.
Since that boat attack, Hegseth’s military has bombed at least 20 others, killing more than 80 people – all without trials or proof that they were ferrying drugs and all a bloody departure from prior efforts to capture traffickers alive to face justice. When not defending the killings as part of an alleged “war” between the U.S. and traffickers, Hegseth’s reaction to the killings has been to joke about them, posting an image of a cartoon turtle firing on armed boatmen.
The mockup turtle image drew heat from, among others, the Canadian publisher of the Franklin books. “Franklin the Turtle is a beloved Canadian icon who has inspired generations of children and stands for kindness, empathy, and inclusivity,” the publisher Kids Can Press wrote in a statement on X. “We strongly condemn any denigrating, violent, or unauthorized use of Franklin’s name or image, which directly contradicts these values.”
Hegseth’s callousness did not amuse some lawmakers either. Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, who has openly sparred with the Pentagon in recent weeks, told reporters that the meme is just one reason why the defense secretary should be fired, calling him “not a serious person,” as NPR reported. “He is in the national command authority for nuclear weapons and he’s putting out … turtles with rocket-propelled grenades.”
And Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, speaking on the floor of the Senate, called Hegseth a “national embarrassment,” calling the Franklin meme a “sick parody.”
Whether Hegseth ultimately weathers the storms he generates is an open question. Democrats have vowed to continue to press the case against him. But, while Trump has said he wouldn’t have ordered the follow-on strike that killed the two shipwrecked men, he has also stood by Hegseth – at least for now.
Whether Hegseth should continue in the job, though, seems hardly in question.
Consider the view of conservative columnist George Will. “Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth seems to be a war criminal. Without a war. An interesting achievement,” he wrote. “The killing of the survivors by this moral slum of an administration should nauseate Americans. A nation incapable of shame is dangerous, not least to itself.”
Focusing particularly on Hegseth’s refusal to sit for an interview with his department’s inspector general and or to turn over his phone, former federal prosecutor and University of Alabama law professor Joyce Vance in her Substack drew a broader lesson. “None of this is what Americans are entitled to expect from a public servant or what a president should demand of his appointees,” she said.
Of course, it’s not clear just what at least some Americans expect from their leaders. Some, perhaps, don’t mind being lied to or maybe they delude themselves as much as Hegseth seems to.