Skip to playerSkip to main contentSkip to footer
  • 6/12/2025
At a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Thursday, Rep. Jill Tokuda (D-HI) questioned Defense Sec. Pete Hegseth.
Transcript
00:00You're not recognized as a gentlelady from Hawaii, Mr. Kuda.
00:03Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I agree we've had many performances today, but what we'd like is some answers.
00:08Mr. Secretary, did you invite Elon Musk for a briefing on war plans with China to the Pentagon?
00:15Yes or no is simple.
00:17There's been a lot of hyperbole and incorrect reporting around that situation,
00:23but we did invite Elon over to come talk to us generally, but there was no war plans being discussed.
00:30Okay, so whose idea was it to invite him to the Pentagon for a briefing?
00:35You mentioned you served at the pleasure of the President.
00:37Was it the President's will to have him come and be briefed?
00:41As you know, at that time, Elon Musk was leading up Doge efforts,
00:45and we've taken a great investment in Doge at DOD,
00:49and so getting his input on how we make DOD more efficient.
00:52It makes a great deal of sense.
00:54Okay, but don't you think it's a conflict of interest for the world's richest man?
00:59Many of the contracts that the DOD is engaged in, billions of dollars of contracts going to his company,
01:06and he is, as to your point, was leading Doge, which was involved in cutting hundreds of contracts,
01:12but also becoming intimately aware of the platforms and the requirements that would be given out for new contracts.
01:17Did you not think it was a conflict of interest to invite someone with financial interest?
01:22And to the Pentagon to have first-hand knowledge of what they could then bid on for their own, you know, enrichment.
01:29Ma'am, it was just an informal discussion, but I'll tell you, anyone that knows our Defense Department knows,
01:34we show no preference to any company other than what your capabilities are,
01:37and we're grateful for the places where his companies benefit our national defense.
01:42So for a $280 million donation, the world's richest man with companies intimately linked and involved
01:49in billion-dollar contracts with the Department of Defense gain access into the Pentagon.
01:55So would you say that any company right now that has multi-billion-dollar contracts with the Department of Defense
02:01has access to the Pentagon right now?
02:04One-hour briefings with you, personally.
02:06On the regular basis, I meet with many people and many different companies
02:11and many different aspects of our defense industrial base
02:14to ensure we have the best possible capabilities.
02:17It would be imprudent to do that.
02:18Well, I'm sure for an investment of $280 million,
02:21Elon's investors are quite happy that it's come out into the billions.
02:24I want to jump questions right now.
02:26Mr. Secretary, on January 6, 2021, rioters and looters attacked federal law enforcement officials,
02:33vandalized and destroyed federal government property,
02:34and caused an estimated $2.7 billion in damages right here at the Capitol.
02:39Would you have sent the National Guard and the Marines in on that day?
02:44Well, unfortunately, President Trump requested the National Guard in advance, and that was...
02:48It took him quite a long time.
02:49I'm asking you, as Secretary of Defense,
02:51would you have sent in the National Guard and the Marines on that day?
02:55We had 140 Capitol Police officers injured.
02:58One died the next day.
02:59Would you have sent in the National Guard and the Marines?
03:02As I said, President Trump directed National Guard to be there in advance.
03:05And I think you can look at the record of how long it actually took for him to actually send them in.
03:10But it's good to hear that it sounds like you would have sent in the National Guard
03:13and the Marines on that day in which the insurrection was taking place right here at the Capitol.
03:19Mr. Secretary, during your confirmation hearing,
03:21you failed to deny the conclusion that you would carry out an order
03:25to shoot protesters in the legs.
03:27So let me be direct.
03:28Given what we are seeing across the country right now,
03:31would you carry out or issue an order by the President for our military to fire upon protesters
03:36actively engaging in their civil right to exercise free speech,
03:41their First Amendment rights?
03:42Would you give that order from the President?
03:45I assume you're insinuating what's going on in Los Angeles,
03:49and I wouldn't call that a people protest.
03:49Not just Los Angeles.
03:50If you take a look at protests throughout the country, it's a simple question.
03:54If directed by the President, would you order our military to fire upon protesters?
04:00Simple yes or no.
04:01Ma'am, we have, as you know, and as this committee knows,
04:04we have standard rules of engagement that are in place that give guidance to our troops,
04:10and they abide by them.
04:11I'm asking what you would do.
04:13Again, you said you serve at the pleasure of the President.
04:17Is that not true?
04:17I do serve at the pleasure of the President.
04:20So if the President told you to shoot people in the legs, would you do so?
04:24Now, you failed to answer this question.
04:25It's only a confirmation hearing when asked by members of the Senate.
04:29Because I refuse to accept a false hypothetical that's attempting to put me in a corner
04:33and make it look like a representation of another.
04:35At a time when we have more Marine the National Guard in Los Angeles than we do in Syria and Iran alone,
04:41I don't think this is a hypothetical.
04:43This is an actual situation that we are dealing with right now.
04:47So, again, I will ask the question, the last 14 seconds I have,
04:49would you order our military to shoot at their fellow countrymen if ordered by the President?
04:56I think it's interesting that for four years, insurrection was the left's favorite word.
05:00I think we know your answer.
05:01Thank you, Mr. Chair.
05:01I yield back.
05:02In L.A., they were generally yields back.
05:04Generally, the time's expired.

Recommended