you? >> the menu is large. any different services and jobs. contrary to the narrative being pushed by one side, we have record number of females, minorities. it is not just one people joining the military. we welcome all americans who are qualified to serve our country. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> the committee will stand in recess for 15 minutes.

thank you chairman rogers p i represent joint base lewis mccord, home to over 40,000 active duty service members and their families.

hosting the army's first core and one third of the air force intercede there 17 fleet. i'm an army brat myself. my father served in the military. he joined the army when it was segregated and continued to serve one president truman desegregated. something that would have been defined as woke back then. i could not be more proud of the soldiers who make up army what it is. as part of the celebration, the pentagon is going to host a daylong festival and parade estimated to cost up to $45 million. department of defense officials have described this as a generational recruiting tool and a plan to highlight every era and legendary leaders throughout army history. secretary hegseth, do you plan to include displays of colin powell, our first black chairman of the joint chiefs of staff? will you include displays about the japanese-american 442nd

regimental combat team, one of the most decorated units of all time? will you include displays about major general charles calvin rogers, whose medal of honor, your department previously labeled as d.e.i.? recent articles by stars & stripes, military times, and others outline how your team has gone to great lengths to wipe out references of these american heroes. i'm incredibly concerned and disappointed that you will continue to try and tell an incomplete story about the army's proud history. especially when you consider 40% of those who are serving represent minority communities. so i'm going to ask you, will you be able to talk about these things and will they be included? and i have another question after that. congresswoman, i do not accept your insinuation we would seek to disclose any race or group of people in representing 250 years of incredible service of the united states army, including

your father, which i thank him for. we are proud we will put on full display the army's military might 250 years on, which is a demonstration of american freedom, power, and commitment. >> i agree, are these people i mentioned going to be included in this celebration? >> this is a parade demonstrating military might, capabilities through the years, including today. >> there will be exhibits pizza will these folks be included? sec. hegseth: i think you will be heartened to know the secretary of defense is not involved in choosing individual exhibits in the celebration. but our team has put in a great deal of effort to make sure the army's history is well represented. part of the reason i'm sitting here and i put on the uniform is a parade that went through my parents hometown in minnesota, blink and you miss it nothing farm town. >> i'm talking about the exhibition. are you going to include colin

powell, the japanese-american 442nd, or major general call -- charles calvin rogers? >> i'm sure we will include a section of a lot of incredible americans and possibly all of them. i have no idea. >> you have no idea, or i'm going to take it as a no? let's talk about ukraine and russia. we know that russia started this war. they have long been an adversary of the united states. at the same time, you heard the president make some interesting comments, not including russia in the widespread random tariffs. one question i will ask as we talk about wanting peace because we agree that is a desired outcome, do you and the president support surrender to russia by ukraine as your definition of peace? sec. hegseth: no one has talked about surrender. we are talking about negotiated peace. >> does it mean you're ok with russia keeping its territory they are trying to take so they

can march onto one of our nato allies? sec. hegseth: i think the situation is unfortunate, unleased by the previous administration. everyone that talks about winning and prevailing has yet to show me a plan that will push the army out of those territories. >> i appreciate you talking about the previous administration often, but we are now in this administration. as the person who serves at the pleasure of the u.s. president, do you believe russia is a true adversary and your definition of peace, is it going to be surrender of ukraine from this invasion? >> i never said surrender. we are prepared to negotiate what we hope will be lasting peace. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from guam. >> thank you to the witnesses, general kane for your service. secretary hegseth, i want to thank you for visiting guam.

it is great to see you once again. i appreciate keeping an eye on the pacific deterrence initiatives and wanting to make sure our readiness projects on guam stay on time and on budget. considering the complexity of working in our isolated territory, workforce constraints and logistical constraints as well, tell us about the mechanisms placed to ensure we maintain our time and budget on these deterrence initiatives. >> thank you for the question. it was great to visit you. i will say a big part of that is focus and attention and time. i was struck, not to be critical of any of my predecessors in this context. but it had been over 20 years since the secretary of defense had visited guam. one of the first places we felt we should go. our focus is in the indo pacific. we have the capabilities, the

facilities, the forward posture we want to maintain. warm being a central part of that. seeing is understanding. we came back from that with a better understanding of what that island and other parts of multiple island chains needed to consider deterring china. our group went right to work. responsive to many of the things we spoke about, also to ensure this budget funds those priorities. indeed the deterrence initiative is robustly embraced through this budget. a lot of other ways in which guam will be part of the future fight >> thank you and i ask for your continued support. romaine workforce is the h to be workers which we will be looking at to extend once again. thank you. one thing that will be helpful for our contractors on guam's regarding the design bid and build.

this makes a lot of delays and change orders and runs due to our site locations and logistical complexities. i asked the department to review some lessons learned from the design build versus the design bid build models. that would release deed things up. i'm hoping it will enable more flex ability for our contract team to do just that. >> one of the core pillars how we are changing acquisitions is flexibility. with the recognition each has unique complexities, logistical challenges, resourcing challenges that need to allow the local leadership to adapt as quickly as possible. the last thing dod usually does is adapt. we are try to give maximum flux

ability and latitude. >> that would be extremely helpful. general crane. with the transition to fully integrate mom defenses, how are we secret rising the existing capabilities like the golden dome architect plans to ensure seamless integration with global missile warning and reconnaissance systems? >> sir, thank you for the question and for your service in the army previously. the importance of integrating our defense capabilities is critical. as we look at systems like that, the department is looking carefully at what has to be true to make sure the other systems are able to bring forward a layered defense system from sensing layer all the way through the kinetic layer making

sure we don't have any gaps. that is something i know the team running thad are doing down in the services. >> a lot of our research making sure this is right to protect our nation and island, it is such a forward proximity. and lessons learned from that will help the nation build on the golden dome. would that be a correct statement? >> i think our goal is to share lessons from not only your home, but the other places of gdi and golden dome will be a part of it. they do accelerated our learning. >> thank, mr. chairman. secretary hegseth, chairman kaine, thank you for being here today.

mr. secretary, your testimony over the last several days i have heard of you speak about your suppose accomplishments from your time at the pentagon. i have to say your training has let you spend months of dangerous dysfunction and incompetence into catchy phrases like restoring the warrior ethos and increasingly valid he. but the truth is it has been chaos at the pentagon under your leadership. you have clearly shown you are unable to manage the department of defense. what i'm most concerned about our three specific areas. your operational incompetence, managerial incompetence, and budgetary incompetence. let's start with operational. according to news reports, in your first week on the job, you got confused in a national security council meeting and you thought president trump wanted you to stop all aid to ukraine. in a well-functioning administration, you have asked clarity before making that policy shift, instead you ordered a vital military aid heading to the front lines

turned around, costing the u.s. millions of dollars and depriving ukrainian soldiers of equipment they needed to fight russia. can you explain how you misunderstood such a monumental presidential order? >> one of many fake news headlines we have dealt with. >> president trump told you to halt military aid to ukraine on january 30? sec. hegseth: as is often the case, highly ideological and very ill-informed reporters love to speculate about things they know nothing about in order to spear president trump and myself. >> it sounds like the reporting is correct because i will say if it wasn't, if it wasn't a mistake, why would a restart only a few days later? >> again, we would take complete issue with what some call reporting and others call a hatchet job. >> so why did aides start a

couple days later? >> i'm saying the reporting is inaccurate. >> i don't think that is correct. let's move on to your managerial incompetence. acting see why you misunderstood the president because your understanding -- misunderstanding my questions. less than a month into the job you fired the chair of the joint chiefs and the chief of naval operations without cause. to this day you have not provided an adequate explanation. you fired cq brown because he was black as far as i can tell, and lisa frank heady because she is a woman. nearly four months later, we still don't have a new nominee for chief of naval operations, news reports, and you can contest it, i would love to hear your answer, that say you have not nominated someone because qualified admirals keep turning the position down. tell me, mr. secretary, when will congress receive your nomination for the next chairman of -- the next chief of naval operations?

>> with all due respect i would suggest not believing every headline you read. ask with all respect i would like your nomination, when will we see it sec. hegseth: there is not a single admiral or any military official that has turned down a position -- >> when will we see our nominee? >> in due time for all the right reasons. >> i think we see the managerial incompetence. let's move on to budgetary incompetence. you missed the deadline to submit a draft defense budget to congress which make it impossible to complete our work on the ndaa or appropriations and makes it more likely you will receive delays in funding you need for new acquisitions programs and other priorities. additionally you are blowing money on poorly conceived operations and vanity projects for president trump, retrofitting the qatari jet to serve as air force one will cost about $400 million. the parade in d.c. will cause upwards of $40 million. your bombing campaign in yemen costs about $1 billion. and they were having missile

strikes in israel one week later. your operations in l.a. will cost tens of millions of dollars. and you claim to be cutting costs at the pentagon but all i see are wasted dollars better spent addressing the most pressing threats like china. what priorities have you cut funding for to pay for these projects? >> i would just say your list left off securing the southern border. >> mr. secretary, what priorities have you cut funding for to pay for these projects? sec. hegseth: we make trade-offs every day, and i would imagine what we want to spend on is quite different than what the previous administration did. they are reflected in this budget and we are very proud of that. >> i think the american people can see why i'm concerned about this incompetence. thank you and i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. >> thank you, mr. chairman. an amazing job you have done not only highlighting the importance

of the war fighter, but getting recruitment and retention to the highest levels we have seen. this is due to good leadership, not managerial problems as one of my colleagues tried to reiterate. because they know they don't want to hear the actual facts and truth. i will go through a couple of things to keep bringing up this aircraft. let's go through history. this has been a long-standing cultural share as aviation was one of the most remarkable things. in 1945, president fdr gifted a douglas to gain -- a king, which began the relation with saudi arabia. an airplane is nothing more than a reason to complain about the president advancing u.s. interests. this is more to complete optics than actual outcomes. we will let them go ahead and spend their wills on a $400 million upgrade not realizing the total cost of an aircraft, i think cost savings is a good negotiation. they talked about the golden dome hurried a lot of things

that are intentionally left off operationally and classified to make sure we keep the sovereignty and protection of our nation without our adversaries actually knowing it. our colleagues know this but they want to highlight it in a way that brings about what you are trying to hide or not be transparent as operational security. what they should be realizing is there's a real violation of a 1962 outerspace treaty. that when the leak was made about sputnik twos capabilities and trying to arm and weaponize nuclear capabilities, maybe we should take a vital interest in not just what we are seeing, but what we are seeing abroad. this is why he created space force. i will also talk about d.e.i.. our recruitment and retention is high because we are no longer factoring diversity, equity, inclusion. we are focused on increased lethality and being equipped. the war fighter eoc claimed was so intact. if it was intact we would not

lower our standards. the stats you were sitting for our armed forces are based on real military and combat needs that we have seen and evaluated and usually lessons left from blood shaft -- bloodshed and loss of life that we base our standards upon and guarantee we have the best, strongest, most prepared war fighters in the world. with reform, i love the fact you are going after the ideas that it is not about trying to have the most expensive at 100%, but what actually functions and saves cost effectiveness and readiness and having it on the table for our war fighter now, not five years from now. when we talk about recruitment and retention, one of the things i want to bring up and i hope you will address, those who are in my opinion unconstitutionally purged from our military for actually having their medical and religious rights denied. i would like to see these individuals wrongfully purged

given the opportunity to not only return to certain our armed forces and nation, but to have the ability to be re-incentivized by having backpay, full benefits, and being returned to the ranks that they deserve without being politicized. we should start naming a lot of our cities and texas and new mexico and arizona something by a ukrainian city than our other colleagues might care about the protection of our borders. this is one thing you have done great by sending our military down there. we have a increase in apprehension rates and complete decrease in human and sex trafficking and fentanyl and opioids killing americans by the thousands. when it comes to the cartels, the president designated our cartels rightfully so as a foreign terrorist organization. what can congress provide in order to better support the mission, physical security of service members, and is there a possibility of a title 55, title 11, title x combination that

allows to be able to work to be able to start going after those cartels? >> i appreciate those comments. as i mentioned earlier, it was not really an authorities issue when it came to securing the southern border. the previous administration claimed they needed new policy, no we needed a new president who was serious about it. we were focused on designating those criminal cartels as foreign terrorist organizations. now we believe we have those authorities and we would come to congress. >> i want to commend you on the operations against the houthis that our previous administration delisted as an organization which was disrupting 12% of global trade in addition to the biden inflation levels sinking the middle class. thank you for what you're doing, we stand by you, i will support you from day one as i always have. keep fighting and let's go after the war fighters. thank you and i yield back area >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. >> thank you, mr. chair.

thank you both for being here. we have all worn the uniform. we've all served in combat. we all love our country. we all revere our troops. i really want to speak with you both not as partisans, but patriots. i want to talk about the events at fort the other day. general kane, i want to start with you. as a junior officer, were you ever required to make a pledge of political loyalty? yes or no? >> as you know -- >> i have limited time. >> no. >> at any time in your 30 plus years of distinguished service, did you have to make a partisan of loyalty? >> no sir. >> did you ever serve in any unit or command at any level where service members were required to make a pledge of political loyalty? >> no sir. >> i want to commend you. you have been on record on this, including in your confirmation hearings where you clarified

"i've never worn any political merchandise or said anything to that effect." i appreciate that. that is the standard and i commend you for saying so and continuing to model that. one last question, should soldiers have to pledge political loyalty to participate with our commander in chief? yes or no? >> first, no. i'm not aware of any time in history that soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines have and asked to do that. >> in the interest of time, i want to talk about what happened at fort bragg. guidance has been verified by multiple independent news outlets. saying these are to the soldiers of the 18th airborne and the u.s. army. the soldiers have political views that are in opposition to the current administration. they need to speak with their

leadership and get swapped out. this is swapped out of the event with the president. in addition, an incredibly disturbing incident, there was a pop up shop selling maga merchandise on post at fort bragg. and to summarize this, there was a commander who said "this has been a bad week for the army. for anyone who cares about us being a neutral institution, this was shameful. if those are the facts, and i know the army is investigating. at least the maga pop up shop. it is appropriate --is it appropriate? >> i have not seen any of these reports. i'm not familiar with them. as i mentioned earlier and my confirmation hearing, the nation demands a political, nonpartisan military. >> secretary hegseth, are you

familiar with dod directive 1344.10, political activities of members of the armed forces? are you familiar -- >> unlike the insinuation pledges are being done under the said ministry can. >> are you familiar with the dod directive? >> there is never one time -- >> mr. secretary. >> -- where politics has been considered for service members. >> are you familiar with this directive? sec. hegseth: which directive? >> dod directive 1344 point and. i'm happy to provide you a copy. there is even a one page red and green cheat sheet. this is the same directive from when we were all in uniform. has anything changed in that directive under your guidance given what happened two days ago at fort bragg? is there a new policy change we are not aware of? sec. hegseth: i totally reject your intuition. >> is there a policy change? sec. hegseth: i know what you are attempting to insinuate --

there has been no policy change -- >> mr. secretary, have you ever worn a maga hat in front of the troops? sec. hegseth: i own plenty of -- >> have you worn one in front of the troops at an official event? sec. hegseth: not that i'm aware of. >> i do believe so. do you think it is appropriate for the president to where political merchandise at official events, including west point commencement? sec. hegseth: he can wear whatever he wants. to include the phrase make america great again -- >> so you think that is appropriate? sec. hegseth: the commander-in-chief has the right in front of his troops to wear whatever he would like. >> i strongly disagree with you and i urge you both, especially general kane, as we see an increasingly political rhetoric, including from the secretary, to please for the good of our troops, this is an incredibly difficult moment and we need leaders like you to continue they political nature. i have 12 seconds.

mr. secretary, i have to say this on the record. i think your tim -- tenure as secretary of defense has been shameful and weak and you should resign. and i yield back. >> the gem's time has expired, the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. >> general kane, is it true or not true that in 1988, plattsburgh air force base edison rotc to get -- cadet? >> yes sir, i thing i was. > you recognize the person you are addressing a? >> i actually do. please don't tell anybody how we did out there. >> we did, we were athletic officers. i believe you worked for me at the time. >> i still do. >> kind of. [laughter] and just for the record, there was a comment recognizing the best cadet of all 200 and they got that right it was the man sitting in front of me. general kane. [applause]

i got an listed captain, so you are winning. i want to talk about the lessons learned in ukraine, how important it is. i also sit on the intelligence community -- committee. and how we can best toward the indo pacific. and if you could also touch on the importance of innovation and acquisition reform. >> yes sir, as i have talked about before, the entrepreneurial spirit out there in europe is one we have all learned from. we look at creating multiple simultaneous cognitive and physical and fiscal dilemmas around the world, we have to take that same entrepreneurial spirit and bring it back here to our nation, both international, defense industrial base. the importance of mass, scale, building a dip in a national base that can provide the combat capability that our war fighters need at the tactical edge is

something the secretary and i and the services are focused on. >> you are both a breath of fresh air. i wanted to visit recruiting furs, and then politics in the military. we've seen recruiting bump over the last three or four years it was a crisis. if we did not solve it, i did not know what we would have done. i would like to ask you because i've asked each of the secretaries of each branch to do a deep dive and come back to congress and let us know that. find out the reasons why we -- why the change, whatever they may be. whatever we are doing, we need to continue to do so we don't get in this situation. if we need some extra funding, folks coming in, i would rather have a few more than a few less. also i want to talk about the fact are a breath of fresh air. because the first and you said to us was you are going to reintroduce war fighting in -- and lethality and force

production into our military. specifically saying you did not want to see politics and fast. we had people appear that were clearly like a democratic general. i never want to see that again. i don't want to see a republican general. i want to see american generals and american generals only ever address us. i thought it was a travesty. i have a case in point. we have here this individual, i believe a major in the army, exalted and venerated above all 2 million active and reservists. by the dod, the former dod, was there any excellence that was done? the computer written this person was transsexual and had a flag in uniform and they were waving it. that person did nothing wrong. we should be venerating people like gary gordon who gave their lives to save mike durant and won the medal of honor. that is the lethality. that is what will deter the chinese. that is what will deter our enemies.

i would like to give you a minute and 13 seconds to expound on that. sec. hegseth: aiden burneymen and you -- sec. hegseth: amen, and you are right. every accusation and insinuation that is politicizing is blatantly false and they know it. there were ideologies and political perspectives being injected into our forces called political correctness, d.e.i., they were being injected in. our job has been to remove those political ideologies and go back to basics. high standards that are the same. we are not looking at race and focusing which is a point of any formation. i did not look at the razorback run of people. i wanted the most capable leader, squad leader, team leader able to do the job. because when it hits the fan, that is what i need. our enemies need to see that.

let me say some thing about the chairman. he's the most professional, apolitical military expert i've ever worked with in our country should be grateful to have him at the helm because they are very steady apolitical hands. >> the gentleman's time has expired. chernow recognizes the gentleman from new mexico. >> i understand the border is a top priority for you and the departing of defense. it is also one of my top priorities. that is why i've introduced i've partisan legislation to stop fentanyl at the border, secure our ports of entry, hire more cbp personnel, and combat the cartels. areas i'm sure we agree on. the dod has spent more than $525 million on -- from the defense budget, our military operations on the border. we have done it by diverting modernizationi, and programs like housing. i'm sure you are well informed as to what your war fighters are doing on our border. in the characteristics of the border itself.

secretary hegseth, do you know how many border miles there are in new mexico? sec. hegseth: not the exact number. >> can you give me a round figure? >> hundreds. >> 180 miles. can you tell me where the border wall starts and ends on this map of new mexico? sec. hegseth: i'm not properly oriented to your map, i know that unfortunately because of the previous administration, they did not have the opportunity to finish the border wall. it is on the ground instead of been put up. >> thank you prayed you have been to new mexico, where? sec. hegseth: i have been to the border twice to look at our national defense area down there. i can't recall a time when a secretary of defense has gone down in the first four or five months of the tenure. >> was it an urban area or rural area? sec. hegseth: both areas. some with walls, some without. if president trump was supported -- >> so the most remote part of new mexico is called the boot heel.

i don't know if you spent any time there, but i was raised on the border per dive lived there my whole life, i've worked alongside ranchers, farmers, landowners, wildlife biologists and other stakeholders. i headed up a border security task force before coming to congress. i traveled with border patrol on atv's, hunted the border on horseback and hiked dozens of miles in the most remote stretches of the border in this region. do you happen to know why there hasn't been a border wall built in the boot heel? sec. hegseth: based on what you just described, you should be a big fan of what are administered -- >> i'm asking why a border wall has not been built? funds have been allocated for other parts of the border. sec. hegseth: our commanders on the ground and engineers would understand what goes where and why and where there should be a border wall. there will be a border wall funded through conciliation. >> are you familiar with the animist mountains, the san luis mounds,? critical border areas. sec. hegseth: i'm aware there are gaps in different places. walls are not as much as effective as other places.

i get that. >> i appreciate that. >> where it makes the most sense were we get 100% operational -- >> you agree a border wall does not make sense for the entire country question mark >> we need a wall on our entire border. >> you should know why it is omos physically impossible to build a wall and the terrain challenges that poses in the animist mountains. do you know if there are roads on those mountains currently? sec. hegseth: if we spend money as us -- >> the point entering to make is if it is so important to the military and you as a secretary and that apartment of defense should know more about the border. mr. secretary, i urge you to skip the photo ops next time you go to a port of entry and spend time on the ground in places like diamond a ranch. sec. hegseth: you should ask the soldiers whether they have been photo op visits or not. soldiers, getting an understanding of -- what their capabilities are. >> secretary, i reclaim my time. sec. hegseth: what troops do -- >> the gentleman reclaims his

time. >> do you know what a tethered air was that system is? sec. hegseth: i do. >> than you know this type of surveillance technology is superior to having thousands of troops sitting in trucks looking at an empty desert i requested funds for more tethered aeros test systems, we have not had a response from your department. are you familiar with ast's? sec. hegseth: no. >> it is an autonomous surveillance tower. they are equipped with advanced cameras with the capability to relay critical information to border agents on the ground. this type of technology is badly needed on the boot heel and a much better expenditure than a border wall. sec. hegseth: i have seen those towers in use. >> great. these technologies have been described to me by border patrol as force multipliers. allowing personnel to focus on law enforcement efforts while leaving monday and surveillance tasks to more efficient and cost-effective technology, a much more efficient way to surveilled that part of the border. i have serious concerns with

your fundamental lack of knowledge about the u.s.-mexico border, considering the billions of dollars dod is slated to spend on this mission with little clarity to those of us who live there. i would encourage you to do homework on my region and learn what will make our border more secure and more safe. thank you, i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, dr. mccormick. >> it is great the democrats are finally concerned about the border. fantastic and i hope more of them join that fight in the future. especially after four years of allowing millions upon millions across the border without any concern until now. when we talk about politicizing the military, i find it very laughable when for the first time -- if you were to wear a make the military accountable to the mission again hat, would it be considered political? sec. hegseth: i think in many ways that is one of our slogans. >> exactly. when i was a young marine and

old marine, or we were always focused on mission a compass and. the eco-'s, making america great . also disqualifying as political. military or nonmilitary person that lives in america. i'm glad you brought the mission back to all services. when i was down at university of north georgia, we chatted to come down with the elite eight. i was really impressed. i always make fun of the army about their pt. they were bringing it. they made it scientific, mission oriented, they were focused 100% in large part because of the new leadership in the military which i'm excited about and looking forward to getting you down there. one of the interesting that happened is the activation of the national guard in california. this has to be done because california did not take care of

its own. we recently sponsored and wrote legislation those states culpable for the national guardsmen when the governor or local magistrates don't do to control their own problem. do you think that is a good idea or do you have a better idea for motivating them and have the president step in? >> what the president has done is common sense. if the mayor will not protect federal law enforcement officers in the execution of their basic functions, the military, whether it is the national guard or the marines, is constitutionally or through statute allowed to come in and provide that security. that is what we have done. the president, unlike in 2020 in venice so it when governor walz allowed a precinct to burn down,

president trump said that will not happen. we will get in front of this, not allow it to cascade. we will protect our law enforcement. he's provided that and we are proud to be on that mission. >> i'm proud the president stepped in. where local democrats have not stepped up to the plate. one of the things i've noticed as a veteran is i had to go down to the das office in person, take half a day off. asking staff to rearrange those things. i had to send in a form to prove my son is still in college. instead of emailing it or faxing it, whatever we do in modern technology, i would hope you and your leadership would help us in a much more friendly 21st century experience. i would hope you would look at that in your administration. finally i want to give you an opportunity to talk about ukraine. one of the things i've said all along is the president is one of the most peaceful presidents there is. this president has avoided war

like no other president in modern history. he's been very good at four and despite his previous lack of spirits. now he did the abraham accords. one of the things i thought would be interesting talking about peace from strength. the u.s. and europe have $53 trillion gdp. russia has two. we decimated them, we meeting of the ukrainian forces with our support, dem -- decimated about one million casualties based on the little bit they have given. do you think according to the supreme allied commander that if we gave them wholesale support we could end the war quickly? >> there are multiple ways in which we could help effect frontline and negotiations the department is prepared to support what might be necessary to do so. our overall message, and there has already been billions spent and authorities that exist now

going in support of ukraine. our encouragement is our european allies continue to step up. >> general kane, what do you think about ukraine? >> i think the killing has got to stop on both sides. thank you for your service as a war fighter. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> thank, mr. chairman. i want to start with commending what you have said today about the apolitical nature of our military. it is a set of values you have served. understand the military respects deeply control and that runs up to the commander-in-chief, no matter which party happens to be in the white house. a pretty powerful example is when you have the state of the union, you and other members of the joint chiefs typically do not applaud for the more

partisan parts of any president's remarks. briefly, tell us why that is even a norm we should care about, why the people should care about that. >> that is codified in the oath of office. our constitution and our commission. it goes all the way back to the beginnings. it has always been our tradition. >> i think it is an important tradition that we should care about no matter which side of the dance we are on. i think we should demand and expect our most senior military commanders understand partisan loyalty does not matter, what matters is the o to the constitution that we all take. any of us have worn the uniform, those who have taken it. i wanted to ask about the kinds of difficult positions commanders are going to be placed in. the guidance that exists now already from the military. i ask this of you because you are not just the president's military advisor, you are the

senior officer in our armed forces. if you or any other commander were ordered to attend a campaign rally, you would decline, am i right? >> sir, per the hatch act, which we get briefs on every year, it outlines clearly what you can and can't do you are in active service. i completely trust and believe in the professionalism of the united states armed forces, as does the secretary, and we follow those guidelines. >> i the. my concern is less that we are going to see bad decisions made by our troops or their commanders i don't think that is a problem. i think they will be placed in positions by civilian leadership. the fort bragg episode to me is one of those examples. i will talk about some of the things, and we have sucked -- we have heard some brought up today. my questions are to give you a chance to put out for the public what you expect of our senior

military leaders. some things the president said in his remarks, referring to a political rival, the governor of california, the mayor of los angeles called him incompetent. referring to governor walz, reference back to the debate between him and now vice president jd vance saying it was a good debate. remember how bad he was, one of the worse. i think he's running for president, can you believe it, he is a radical left lunatic. that is a. referencing the continued lie he did not lose the 2020 election. president trump said i was thinking about running because election was rigged and stolen. that is what the commander-in-chief is saying in any event with troops ordered to attend. and let me be clear, presidents for a long time have always had the prerogative to compel the attendance of our troops, to be there as commander-in-chief. this is different to me. you her discussion of the campaign murch being sold on

base, another piece of this, invitations to the event went out from donald trump's campaign. had an invitation taken to a place where you can contribute. donald j. trump.com. my concern is of course you and i think any commander would agree to attend any rally, but something traditionally troops have attended, but it turns into something that is a campaign rally. what should our commanders be doing when put in this position? >> i hope you will allow me to answer this, by even my engaging in answering this question, that is making my job involved in politics. while i appreciate the question, i think the chairman and the force should stay out of politics. if i engage in this question,

with deep respect and appreciation for your question, i don't think it is an appropriate question for me to answer. >> general, i agree with the way you are approaching this. that is what we should expect of our leaders. in the 10 seconds i have left, i'm very concerned for the position you and other senior leaders have been placed in. i urge you as the president's military advisor to give advice to knock it off. >> the gentleman's time has expired for the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin. >> mr. secretary, did you take the oh to defend the constitution of the united states? >> yes i did. general, did you? >> yes i did. >> let's delve into that document. article two, section two. the commander-in-chief of the army and navy, so when people are listening to the commander-in-chief, they are fulfilling their constitutional duty that they took the o's to defend and uphold the constitution. what these folks are saying is

absolutely shameful because when they are calling you incompetent, guess who is listening? our enemies. the people who are plotting as we sit in this comfortable room in an air-conditioned beautiful space are plotting the deaths of us. americans. it is shameful and i wish my colleagues would come back and apologize to you personally. let's cover a couple of other things. someone who has gender dysmorphia and decide to generate their meat -- mutilate their genitals, they are out of pocket for about three years. how many countries is the dod involved in right now? 50, 60, 80, 100? someone is going to get on a plane and leave their family and potentially leave their wife a widow, or their husband a widower because somebody decided to self actualize. we are going to go forward and complete the mission because that is what we do.

a lot of my colleagues simply don't understand that or they are trying to ignore it. the former chief of naval operations was incompetent and gave the red sea to the houthis. the former chair of the joint chief of staff let so much d.e.i. garbage fly around that it almost destroyed the military. that is why they got fired. as far as standards, the standard is the minimum. that is the minimum level of performance someone will reach or they are not qualified for the job the nfl does not have a standard for females. if you are a lady who wants to join the nfl, go try out for the team. how may women play in the nfl? the answer is zero. why is there an nba and wnba? because they acknowledge biology. we can have as many high-tech things available. but at the end of the day to win a war, you need someone to go into the room -- that is a fact.

and all of this other stuff is meaningless. the chinese communist party does not care what your pronouns are. they care if they know we will be able to destroy them, crush them, grind them into dust if they mess with the u.s. mr. secretary, there are five soft truths are the first is the people are more important than hardware. do you concur? >> i would concur with that and your previous statements. >> general, do you concur humans are more important than our work? >> i do. along with the other -- >> here is an issue i'm having right now. it does not matter how great our people are, if they are not upholding the oaths and understanding the president of the united states is commander-in-chief, and you are the secretary of defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs of

we have had a rash of incidents around bases that can only be described as in. taking down the president's portrait, turning the vice president's pictures around removing them from stations, covering them with flags. it is insubordination. insubordination is a crime according to the united states code of military justice. what i need to hear from you, mr. secretary, and i commend you for your performance and what you did at fort mccoy in my district, i need to hear from you you are actively trying to find people subverting the chain of command and you will actively -- you will deal with them in an appropriate manner. sec. hegseth: when we find incidents like that they are immediately addressed. rep. van orden: would it be a

political account to hold someone accountable for subordination? soldiers, sailors, marines, guardians? gen. caine: ofc course you have to have context around that. i would want to know more information, sir. rep. van orden: i want to commend you for your performance today and your restraint by not lashing out at some of the most disgraceful comments i have ever heard in my short tenure in congress. with that, i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentlelady from hawaii. >> i agree we have had many performances today. what we would like his answers. mr. secretary, did you invite elon musk for a briefing on more plants with china to the pentagon? sec. hegseth: there has been a lot of hyperbole an incorrect reporting around that situation. we did invite to long to come talk to us generally. there were no more plans discussed.

>> whose idea was it to invite him to the pentagon for a briefing? was it the president's well to have him be briefed? sec. hegseth: as you know, at that time elon musk was leading doge efforts and we have taken a great investment in doge at dod. so getting his input on how we make dod more efficient makes a great deal of sense. rep. tokuda: do you think it is a conflict of interest for the world's richest man, the dod is engaged in billions of contracts going to his company. he is coming to your point, was leading doge, which was involved in cutting hundreds of contracts and becoming intimately aware of the platforms and requirements that would be given out for new contracts. did you not think it was a conflict of interest to invite someone with financial interests into the pentagon to have firsthand knowledge of what they could then bid on for their own enrichment? sec. hegseth: it was an informal

discussion. anybody who knows ours defense department knows we show no preference to any company other than what your capabilities are. we are grateful for the places where his companies benefit our national defense. rep. tokuda: so the world's richest man's with companies intimately linked and involved with billion-dollar contracts of the department of defense gained access to the pentagon. would you say that any company right now that has multibillion-dollar contracts with the department of defense has access to the pentagon now? for one hour briefings with you, personally? sec. hegseth: i meet with many people and companies and different aspects of our defense industrial base to ensure we have the best possible capabilities. rep. tokuda: i am sure foreign investment of $280 million elon's investors are happy it has come to the billions. i want to jump questions. mr. secretary, january 6, 2021 rioters and looters attacked federal law-enforcement

official, vandalized and destroyed federal government property and caused $2.7 billion of damages at the capitol. would you have sent the national guards and marines in that day? sec. hegseth: president trump requested the national guard in advance. rep. tokuda: i am asking you as secretary of defense would you have sent in the national guard and marines that day? we had 140 capitol police officers injured. would you have sent in the national guard and marines. sec. hegseth: president trump directed the national guard to be there. rep. tokuda: you could look at the record of how long it took him to send them in. but it is good to hear you would have sent in the national guard and marines that day that the insurrection was taking place at the capitol. during your confirmation hearing you failed to derive the conclusion you would carry out an order to shoot protesters in the legs. let's meet be direct. given what we are seeing across the country now would you carry out or issue an order by the

president for our military to fire upon protesters actively engaging in their civil right to exercise free speech, their first amendment rights? would you give that order from the president? sec. hegseth: i assume you are insinuating what is going on in los angeles. rep. tokuda: not just los angeles. throughout the country. if directed by the president, would you order our military to fire upon protesters? sec. hegseth: as you know, as the committee knows, we have the standard rules of engagement that are in place that gives guidance to our troops. they abide by then. rep. tokuda: i am asking what you would do. again, you said you serve at the pleasure of the president. is that not true? sec. hegseth: i do. rep. tokuda: if the president told you to choose people in the legs, would you do so? during your confirmation hearing you failed to answer this question as well. sec. hegseth: i refuse to accept

a false hypothetical. rep. tokuda: at a time where we have that national guard in los angeles, more there than in syria and iran, it is not a hypothetical. it is an actual situation we are dealing with now. the last 14 seconds i have. would you order our military to shoot at their fellow countrymen? if ordered by the president? sec. hegseth: it is interesting that for four years -- rep. tokuda: i yield back. >> the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from virginia, mr. mcguire is recognized. reppo maguire thank you mr. chairman and our witnesses and to all of our men and women who have served and are -- or are serving your mission is important and we would not have a country without you. sec. i last saw you on memorial day. we really appreciate your remarks as we honored and remembered our fallen. thank you both for being with us today. gen. caine congratulations on

your recent confirmation as chairman of the joint she -- chiefs of staff. president trump put his trust and confidence integrate patriots to lead our men and women in uniform. today -- to me, maga means america first. that is america first or make america great again for all americans. regardless of race, religion, or agree to. your policies are working. day by day, week by week all americans are safer at home or abroad. we commend you for your efforts. if you had a basketball team meditated your team, you would probably not win any games. all of us love the emphasis on patriotism and loving our country. sec. hegseth i also want to thank you for all you have done to restore the department of defense focus on lethality and warrior ethos. facts do not care about your feelings. our enemies do not care about

our social experiments. a quote from the commandant of the marine corps. i hope i do not mess it up. "our job is to stick bayonets in the hearts of our enemies. these social experiments detract from that mission." i get messages from my navy seal brothers and other veterans all the time of god and the work you are doing. the distractions of the last four years of the biden administration or farley out of the department of defense. d.e.i., which to me, is marxist, and stands for didn't earn it/ . it no longer takes precedent in our military. merit is valued. the policies that have been erasing women. climate change is no longer the concern of the war fighter. i am looking forward to celebrating with you guys saturday. 250 years of the story that must be told of the u.s. army. i want to thank president trump

for restoring american history. i know you had to jump through some gymnastics to do it. by returning our bases their names that many of us called home during her time in service. thank you for showing the u.s. and the world that we are a nation built on law and order by the department's response to the l.a. riots. through your leadership and the help of this committee we will realize peace through strength and our mario a sense -- warrior e-service. section 856 of the defense authorization act directs the department to submit a strategy to ensure solid rock and photo programs of record are adequately supported by the domestic industrial base. solid rock and motor programs is essential to systems like president trump's golden dome that we have been lacking. what progress has of the department made in developing a solid rocket motor based

industrial strategy? sec. hegseth: in general the defense industrial base is a focus of ours. particularly, on solid rock projection i would have to hand it over to my colleague. if it was a priority that this committee identified, that we identified, you can count on a 13% increase in the budget. >> in my district, virginia's fifth congressional district we applaud what you are doing to protect our country. we have a place called the accelerated training defense manufacturing. as i toured the new columbia submarine and the new enterprise air product -- air force carrier the secretary of the navy said the welders have the same level of training as a neurosurgeon. we do not have enough of those guys. they are doing that out of my district. if your schedule ever permitted to visit i would love to tour that with you. we appreciate all you are doing. under president trump's leadership you said recruitment is up in the army.

i think you said all service is up. is that right? yes, sir. rep. mcguire: maybe getting rid of divisive ideologies has something to do with that. sec. hegseth: very much so. it is the leadership from president trump and the environment they are entering into, back to basics. rep. mcguire: morale among enlisted service members is up, would you agree? sec. hegseth: i have seen that. rep. mcguire: the force is united against the problems we have out there. sec. hegseth: we are lucky to have you. thank you for all you are doing. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. davis. rep. davis: thank you mr. chairman mr. secretary for being here today. and to gen. caine. the radar just lit up. at that point, we were in an hour-long fight just are to kill whatever we could. these were words of seymour

johnson air force base speaking of the deployment that occurred on april 13, 2024, in the middle east were pilots shot down rockets, drones heading to israel from iran. another pilot said, it was a deployment like we have never seen before. mr. secretary, i am incredibly proud of the airmen at seymour johnson air force base. i was glad to join the acc commander at a declaration ceremony recognizing 31 of the airmen and what they accomplished. they accomplished the mission april 13. as you have highlighted, the war he says, the sadder -- war ethos of lethality and readiness

i cannot think of a better example than what we saw april 13. there was not a lot of time and they packed up and took those f-15s to the middle east and got the job done. seymour johnson plays a key role in our national defense. it also is a location of the air task force. we have our air task force. it aims to generate more efficient integrated and deployable units. mr. secretary, the air force is conveying the commitment of plans to bring back f-15 e's, with 229 engines. meanwhile, we are working. i am trying to prioritize operational and maintenance needs. we have to come back and address the training needs. in your opening statement, you

mentioned the 747. -- the f-47. can you expand further your vision, looking long term of the potential of seymour johnson air force base and others to deliver and ensure the nation's continued air superiority in the face of growing deterrence? sec. hegseth: i will take it briefly, then hand it to the chairman. i have met some men and women from april 13, impressive americans. we are investing. a lot of the 747 capabilities are classified. but with a six generation fighter of that type, it's shows our adversaries we are prepared to project power in the future. where those go and are stationed is an open question. we are happy to take a look. rep. davis: thank you to speaking with our airmen. mr. secretary. gen. caine: thank you for your service in the air force and in

the joint force as well. piling on here, that particular day for the air force was not just a strike eagle crews, but also the maintainers on the ground and loading missiles up while there was engagements going on right over their heads. extraordinary acts of bravery under fire out of your warm -- your home district. rep. davis: general caine, thank you for your service. you are honored to serve along side some of the most credible warriors and civilians and their families. you said, i always, especially remember our fallen and our families who demonstrate to courage, sacrifice, and commitment to our families. corporate brian russell was at fort bragg and killed march 5, 2000 seven in iraq. i talked to his mother. he was 20 years old. he was killed with others about the same age.

she said that the only thing she missed the most was his smile. my question is, we have an instance where we can't bring back those loved ones. representative higgins, myself, if you could look at hr 1363i would ask you to do so. mr. secretary, i would ask, what else are we doing to honor our fallen? sec. hegseth: we will look at 1363. we initiated the first-ever advisory board for gold star families at the defense department, to follow through on their families as well, finding every way possible to recognize. rep. davis: and i too heard your memorial day comments. i yelled back. >> the gentleman yields back. now, another north carolinian. >> thank you mr. chairman, secretary -- secretary

hegseth and chairman kaine, first i want to identify with my colleagues comments from wisconsin but to get a step further. i think you are all owed an apology. though i really wish all of my democratic colleagues comments were of the nature of my colleagues from north carolina just a minute ago, it is not what happened today. all we saw was a flagrant disrespect towards both of you. it is not what this committee is about. we should be able to disagree without showing disrespect. we should be able to have discourse without sewing discord and we should be able to question without using words you cannot take back and that is not what happened today from the other side of the committee. we need to do a lot better than this. but, gentlemen, you handled the questions with humility and grace. today, many of my democratic colleagues have struck out.

it is the second day in a row many of my democratic colleagues have struck out. with that, i have a couple questions for you today. mr. secretary, i want to talk about army transformation initiative. i want to thank you for the bold work you have done to reshape our nations army. purging our department of defense and our army of legacy weapons systems for structures and contracting mechanisms that have not helped us win the last 30 years of war are not relevant to helping us deter or defeat china. it is something this country desperately needed. it is something american taxpayer is desperately needed. it is something our servicemen and women have desperately needed. what is your plan to integrate the army transformation initiative across both our navy and our air force? sec. hegseth: great point.

i want to first complement army chief general george as well as army secretary driscoll for their initiative of the gate to not waste any time recognizing precisely what you said. that we need an army structured and prepared to fight the wars of the future. we owe it to the american people. they followed in large part a marine corps that led the way overall, as sometimes they do, often. i recognize other services that the navy and air force could do more in that regard as well. different ships, you might say, to steer than the army. and how you effectuate modernization, that shift. the hard choices we are making in platforms and capabilities in those services mirror the hard choices we are making in the army. that is what we see as our job. at the moment now considering the threats we face and world we live in i will spend the i have to be happy to take the arrows of constituencies or districts

and say, no, we will put forward what is best for the army cover the marine corps, the navy, or air force and make tough calls. that might create consternation. that is ok. our job is to ensure our budget matches our capabilities. army transformation is a great example and we will look forward to it in other services too. rep. barragan: -- rep. harrigan: there is a lot of talk today about the golden dome and i don't appreciate my democratic colleagues not knowing what that is about or why we have to have the golden dome. but i believe we have to have many domes across our country. we have had very low cost, high impact technology proliferate around the world. i think we need to look no further than what happened in ukraine many weeks ago where you had $100,000 of investment by

ukrainians. you need to look forward into the future to anticipate that we may face the exact same threats, maybe not against our military, but against our infrastructure, against our stadiums, against our city centers. we need to many domes to protect the country against those threats. how are you all working out that problem? gen. caine: thank you for the question. thank you for the service. one of the things we are learning is the nature of the way we fight wars is changing. there are problems of mass where the numbers of kinetic exchanges and, frankly, non-kinetic and in the cyber domain are increasing, exponentially so. we have to match networks with networks. as we move forward to create the force of the future, that is on the radar. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from california.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, so many topics to cover. i represent california's 31st district located in southern california where you have deployed the national guard and marine combat battalion. in an effort by this administration to provoke a confrontation. god only knows for what reason. as my colleague from tennessee mentioned, the military has been activated before by the president. but let's tell the whole story. president johnson federalized the troops after the governor of alabama activated them to keep black students out of the university of alabama. president johnson did that so students could attend the university. he did it for the right reason. he corrected a wrong. california did not ask the president for help. the presence of the military is an effort by this administration to intimidate and incite fear and violence amongst its citizens. you failed at ensuring basic operational security by sharing classified data over an unclassified network.

this was blatant and lazy and put service members' lives at risk. in knowing your office is a skiff i hope you are not bringing in your devices, your personal cell phone or work phone because that is not supposed to be in there either commodity or office to send the signal chat texts. your blatant a lack of basic obstetric -- opsec would have forced you to resign from any other administration. europe required 8% cuts across all services, not to save the taxpayers money, but to fund president trumps pet projects, to talk about quality of life for our service members, yet, taking billions of dollars away from the army meant to. and, you said that money, but we don't know that yet because we don't see the budget. if the president has projects he wants funding for you need to

come before this body and provide reasoning. not just shift money around. right now you are stealing from service members. you are robbing peter to pay paul. you have repeatedly said you will judge every individual on merit. is that true? sec. hegseth: unlike the previous administration. yes. rep. cisneros: yes or no? sec. hegseth: everybody on merit how good they are at their job. rep. cisneros: you were separating thousands of service members and who are performing and doing their job at a high level. simply not true. you asked the secretary of the navy to change the name of a ship.

if a korean war veteran and a knife -- navy diver that gave his life standing up for his beliefs does not meet your definition, i don't know what will. keep talking about recruitment. but let's face the facts here. i have seen plenty of individuals, many of them. enlisted members. who, if given the opportunity,

have succeeded not because of their sex, not because of their color, but because of their sexual identity. but because of their work ethic. what's the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from indiana reppo mesmer thank you, for being here today. secretary hegseth, i want to start by following up on questioning from this morning. i appreciate your response regarding this program and i want to add my voice to those who believe this is a vitally important program and i am looking forward to the budget boost for its development and deployment. is there would anything else you would like to add?

>> i think it is an important part of the battlefield of the future. rep. messmer: general caine, in response to a question on nonstrategic nuclear capabilities you spoke about the four cs across enterprise. i want to focus my question on the composition -- competition piece. rep. mcguire and secretary hegseth would you agree in general the department has better outcomes when it engages in industry in the competitive process? gen. caine: yes, sir, absolutely we do. there are many case studies over the ark of the last 30, 40 years that show how the taxpayer gets a better deal, the warrior gets a better deal when multiple entrants come to the table to drive better outcomes out of each of the producers.

as we look at house efforts, the senate's efforts to work together along with the department and other leadership to generate that defense industrial base of the future, i really hope we encourage competition. not just with the existing primes, but new entrants, even startups. i spent some time in the private sector as an entrepreneur. i realized quickly the value of competition to get better outcomes. >> secretary. sec. hegseth: we are at a special moment where i a lot of younger, scrappy or dynamic companies want to enter the market and our job is to open that up them not just to the big guys that have mostly defense related industries at this point, not as much of a commercial base in some cases. that aperture has widened it to other, smaller, medium-sized companies that invest a lot of their own money in r&d in the hopes they can cross the valley

of death and participate in larger systems. we want a lot more competition. are you considering --rep. messmer: are you considering an open process for the development of the missile sec. hegseth: system? sec. hegseth:i don't know the protect -- particulars of that competitive process but we can get them to you. rep. messmer: secretary hegseth, on a subcommittee hearing you mentioned our office partnership and how you have been working with minister morals and it secretary haley, not only requirement -- relied on the previous administration's framework but finding new ways to supercharge pillar two and setting up new protocols. what is best to ensure pillar two can deliver to war fighters? sec. hegseth: i don't want to get ahead of our discussions with australia and the u.k. in particular, but they are ongoing and recent with an interest in identifying precisely those

projects we share mutual interest in that are a part of our future fight where all of our defense industrial bases can contribute and benefit from collaboration. we are looking for that. rep. messmer: do you anticipate hypersonic capabilities? a hypersonic line vehicle or new electronic warfare systems? >> i think you are at our meeting sir. long-range fire has been a part of our conversation. >> secretary hegseth and general kane we know china is developing hypersonic technologies at alarming pace. the previous administration did not prioritize funding for our missile defense and epicenter programs. can you speak about the trump administration and your apartment -- department of us be confused about hypersonic missile defense? >> i will defer privatization to

my leadership. the mix of capabilities we need to include hypersonic end other long-range fire to achieve the effects at the tactical edge so that we can win in the future and continue to win the way we do now. >> i yield back my time. >> the chair recognizes that gentlelady from new hampshire. >> thank you drug draw witnesses for being here today. we have one important thing in common, we all swore an oath to this great document, the united states constitution. we swore that oath when we joined the military and when we began the jobs that we are holding now, and i went to begin at the beginning of this document and at the beginning of your testimony. mr. hegseth, and the first sentence of your testimony you said you were here to testify about fiscal year 2026 budget

for the department of defense. you are required under law to submit this budget to the congress because we have got the power of the purse. no later than the first monday in february. here we are in the second thursday of june, we do not have your budget as the chairman and ranking member have pointed out. you have testified that you want to be accountable for every dollar, every taxpayer dollar and where it goes. when can we expect your budget? >> as i also acknowledge in the first year of administration -- addressing the parties of their previous ministrations. >> when can we expect your budget? >> you have details on it and you can expect it soon. >> get to be effective before the end of the month? >> there is a great detail

provided by the committee. >> you are also required by law to pass an audit. the department of defense is the only department that has continually failed an audit. you committed to passing an audit in 2028 but we expect you to pass any audit this year. mr. chairman, i went to thank you for your testimony and what you said about the threats that we face as the united states, threats from china, russia, and iran, and i want to ask briefly questions about each. mr. chairman, you said the chinese communist party advancing an unprecedented military monetization effort with cutting edge technologies including artificial intelligence. do you agree the united states military must have more powerful ai capabilities than china? >> first, thank you also for your service in the navy. i think llm's and i underpinning

our capabilities is now and will be a key and essential tool for decision-making. thank you, i agreed that american ai dominance is extremely important. mr. hegseth, should american domination nai be up for conversation? >> as the chairman said, we are doing that. >> will you commit to telling the president not to sacrifice american dominance nai in any of his conversations with the chinese? >> the president is not surrendering any of his dominance to the chinese. >> you both spoke to the importance of competition in the defense industrial base and i agree with that deeply. i point out that 40% of small businesses have left our defense

industrial supply chain in the past decade, and trade wars that have caused them president and uncertainty are going to drive more small businesses out of business, and that is something i hope we can work together to prevent, because it is very real in my home state of new hampshire. mr. hegseth, did you order a pause against offensive cyber operations against russia? >> i know the story you are referring to and it is false. >> so it is your testimony that you never ordered a pause in offensive cyber operations against russia. >> we did not. >> i will skip around because there has been a lot said in this hearing that is given me great concern. one of the things that is been set in this hearing is i want to give you the opportunity to correct the record and make clear that you will abide by, obey a ruling of the united

states supreme court. sec. hegseth: i don't believe we have any cases pending by the supreme court now. >> will you abide by a ruling, by decision of the united states supreme court if you are asked to do so. sec. hegseth: district courts should not set the foreign policy of the united states of america. >> mr. hegseth, this is a fundamental principle of the united states constitution. >> the gentlelady's time is expired. >> thank you for being here at your extensive commitment and time today. this is the way the system is supposed to work. i went to ask mr. secretary on the service member family and health care side. you brought up quality of life improvements made in partnership with congress over the prior year and going forward and your

commitment. i got it done what you said, which is the quality of care given by defense health care system is an important priority for you. at the end of the last year prior to the current administration service in office there was an a concern in many army base towns about what we viewed as a push from the by administration to downgrade a number of our health care facilities. i represent fort riley, and we were concerned about the future of the hospital. we thought we had that sidetracked, and perhaps we do, but we have heard some concerns were bubbling up against that perhaps dha is taking another look, and i just want to be sure that it is on your radar screen. we understand some of the resource deployment issues, and with respect to ryan, -- erwin, it is a wonderful facility, a state-of-the-art facility.

the physical plan is underutilized. one of the ways we have attempted to respond to that is to work with the command staff and his team at riley to connect them with appropriate high-grade civilian providers in the area to try to bring my specialty capacity there to look at other ways to fully utilize that capacity for service members, their families, veterans in the area and perhaps others, it may be be creative. we want to grow our way out of any back of the envelope challenges. we do not want to shrink our way out of it, so i went to bring that your attention and i guess i would ask do we have cause to be concerned? could we have an assurance that if there is cause for concern you will take another look at this and engages fully before we have any surprises. sec. hegseth: we will take a look. we are increasing our competitors on the health care side to make sure we are addressing duties properly and we are willing to get rid of, and one of those is working with

v.a. i mentioned that earlier where there are princes -- places we can cross level and to ensure the skill sets necessary for different festivities. looking to the civilian side is another alternative, so i do not know if you had particulars on the facility, but we will get more information to you. >> appreciate that. maybe we can follow up with you, but we want to get creative. it is a great asset and for rarely in particular as you know, it is any old cavalry posts. it provides relatively large maneuver space in the middle of the country. we wanted to survive and thrive in the 21st century war fighting environment, and in order to do that we have got to make sure we are doing the small things that are critical, and quitting providing the right kind of health care to our troops. shifting gears event, and i do not know if this is appropriate

for the secretary or the general , with respect to the future of the t7 -- e-7, we are more interested in aerial surveillance assets, there has been some discussion that the seven might be under consideration for brief consideration going forward and some talk about the bridging platform. what can you tell us about the thinking there and in particular , what level of confidence do you have that the e-2 has the capacity to do the operations we need to do that is a long distance? sec. hegseth: i would file the e-7 under the tough choices file. it was a goldplated, late and over because, it would look at the future fight extending the e to d is our view.

we believe it is the future. the technologies are able to deliver even more robustly the aerial platform, sword budget does work like those tough choices. >> can it do what we needed to do over the pacific? >> we know that the e-7 being late to cause may not make it in time, and that is part of the consideration we are looking at. >> i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentle lady maryland. >> i went to echo my colleagues and their concerns are running on the other issues including the deployment of marines to los angeles, the importance of supporting our ally in ukraine, the alarming security breach that was signal gate and -- i went to follow-up on my college from new hampshire. setting aside district courts do you believe you have the authority to defy a supreme court ruling, yes or no?

sec. hegseth: we are not here to defy a supreme court ruling. >> i want to move on to cyber calm -- com in my state. general hoch was relieved of his command following a tweet that accused him of being disloyal to the president, and the oath that you took and the oath that i took does not demand loyalty to any president but this constitution, and to get as of this date in a mohawk, and his successor has not been named and you stated many times the lithology of the military is critical, so it is difficult to understand of the fenestration will allow any position to remain unfilled, especially those who lead combat and commence. i dried my colleague and my great concern that the firing and the delay of hiring only gives assurance and comfort to our adversaries, so i am sure you would agree any combat and

command cannot be at its most lethal if the commander remains absent. when will the president announced the new commander. sec. hegseth: there is a very highly capable deputy there. we recognize that and during the process of ensuring that slot is filled. >> in the next month, two months, three months? sec. hegseth: it will not be that long. >> general came -_ caine, you stated -- can you confirm for this committee that you hold this view to that day and speak to the importance of the arrangement? >> that reflects the current policy of the administration. the secretary as does the president reserves the right to rethink that, both organizations are critical and whether they

are a single or dual have a relationship of director will take a look at the risk associated with each one of them and come back to our civilian leaders with that risk and let them make a decision on it. >> you are in the room advising the president as to what is best for national security? >> i am in the room. >> can you commit to continuing the efficacy -- advocacy. >> if directed to take a look at it we will carefully measure the goods and others but you have my commitment i will be giving my candid and forthright military device to the secretary and the president. >> i went to remove -- want to move to sexual assault in the military. it brings a lifetime of pain to

victims. it is important that funding increases and any flatline of that funding would be of use -- viewed as a decrease. you made commitments that you would support a robust sexual assault program and response program that seeks to drive sexual assault in the military down to zero. i commend you for that commitment and agree with it, and yet it has been brought up many times we have no budget by which to measure your commitment and your promises, so can you commit today than when we do it let us receive your final fy 26 budget we will see an increase in funding and a plan as to how to drive sexual assault on to zero? sec. hegseth: i applaud congress for the imprint that of an ongoing to address the issue, which we do need to drive to zero. the funding has not been reduced. we have looked at a lot of points for efficiencies. you have seen the same as i have that thing for lee sexual assault's are coming down and we continue to want to do that.

>> i hope it is not level funded and we can continue to drive that dump. moving on to a similar topic, which was rape kits, enable to get the issued a memorandum denying civilians were victims of sexual assault and rape access to the kits. if i could get for the record reclamation for this decision, civilian support the dod. it is important we find and bring justice to those victims and i look forward to working with you on it. >> the jail and from colorado. >> thank you for being here, and i want to apologize for the personal attacks. my mom and dad taught me to be different. we have heard multiple times this year that we cannot do golden dome because it will cause china and russia to build

better missiles to get around our dome. for that to make since it would mean china and russia are not advancing the technology. i found the golden dome caucus. is that an accurate statement? sec. hegseth: i think it is fair to say like us they are preparing to advance in every possible. >> el paso county is projected to see significant population growth over the next three decades, and we are proud that the region has become such a desirable place for families, but that growth has to be balanced with protecting critical operations of our five military installations, and that is why initiatives like security open space and agriculture resiliency initiatives are so important. through a combination of private funding investigate regional

conservation partenrship program supports targeted land acquisitions to military bases. these efforts will preserve wildlife, agriculture and maintain the necessary buffer zone that allows military missions to continue. does the department of defense plan to continue to support the program in the fy 26 budget request to congress? >> yes, sir, it does. >> the colorado trust for public land has been awarded $18.5 million usda grant to help leverage dod funds and reduce future land use conflict on installations like the u.s. air force academy. i understand usda's currently holding the funds under review. on the recognize this may fall outside of your direct

jurisdiction, the success of this land acquisition is essential to protecting the academy's training capabilities. can i count on your assistance in working with usda to find a solution to protect the readiness of the air force academy and responsible federal funding? sec. hegseth: we are happy to look at that with you. >> i would like to talk about the border. my district is home to u.s. northern command and we are proud with what northern command has done with the authorities. the president gave northern command on the southern border and forth id as work done there. can you talk about the great work on military serving in securing the southern border? sec. hegseth: we think it is foundational and fundamental work. because the previous administration allowed 21

million illegals from places we do not to enter into our country, and thank you for asking me that. i see questions that are meant to sow discord, and you have said the technicalities of an invasion. we are not talking about an invading army. we are talking about the invasion of human beings, mostly military age males, and they facilitated this under the previous fenestration, so my position, i can clearly state that it is an invasion and we are proud of the military at the border to interdict that. we are working together with the border patrol to ensure the number goes from 99.9% to 100% at the southern border. i cannot commend the joint staff, north com and our

military for reacting to that and deploying the manpower and expertise necessary, because for two decades we spent 20 years guarding other people's borders and we got good at it, and it is about time we take that expertise and applied two hours. >> it is similar to what is happening in los angeles, it is a support role. thank you, mr. secretary. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. >> thank you, mr. chairman and mr. secretary, thank you for your service to the country. i am a new member of congress from the north side of los angeles, and i am proud to represent a region with about the large veteran community and a world-class aerospace production base. it was our area that broke the

speed of sound for the first time, that assembled the space shuttles and that dell builds many of the most advanced aircraft. i went to start my communique in my deep concern for the deployment of troops to los angeles county. i have received briefings for military leadership including the marine corps and national guard, and one thing is eminently clear. so far this operation has been poorly planned and poorly executed. and is not an example of the operational and logistical excellence that the department of defense is famous for. our service members have been sleeping on the concrete floors of federal buildings and even outside on roads. no contract has been made to feed them or adequately house them. northbound was document adequate time to absorb these guard units. lines of command are muddy at best. i have heard northcom is the

lead agency, dhs is the lead agency, the fbi is the lead agency, or that your office, mr. secretary, is the lead agency. it is unclear whether the marines would been deployed to have completed their full training for the civilian focus nonlethal nation. the briefings that we have received today indicate only a fraction of the assigned forces are actually being utilized on a day-to-day basis. on top of this yesterday we heard in your testimony the department may start sending troops to other cities and states, and early today and you refused to say whether he would follow the decision of the supreme court on the legality of the deployments of the national guard and the marines. we are on an extra nearly dangerous path. the nation's founding fathers were skeptical of the mystic deployment of federal troops. that skepticism stretches all the way back to the boston massacre and is a skepticism

based on blood. going forward, i would urge you to avoid politics and pay attention to what law enforcement officers are saying on the ground. i've been lucky to work for several inspiring leaders. i was nasa chief of staff, my boss was the administrator charlie bolden. this is a marine who flew hundreds of combat missions and commended the mission which deployed the hubble space telescope, done the largest object deployed by the subtle -- the shuttle. i have not been a member of the armed services committee for very long, but in that time i have had the privilege to meet and talk with the seniormost members of our military. i have met men and women who serve figures in combat zones. what have i learned from these american heroes?

leaders do not just speak. they listen. they are strong but show humility. they are curious to learn from all members of their team. you and your team have made multiple serious errors, putting our pilots and troops at risk by disclosing information in close channels. eyring team members who seem unable to work together well and hold confidential information private. we need the department of defense to be run well so that our troops are led well and our nation is protected. in order for that to happen, i suspect you will need to listen more and talk less. you will need to be more curious and capable of learning from different voices. i know that is not the style of this administration come up with what the lives of millions of service members and hundreds of

millions of americans depending on your capacity to learn and change. i sincerely hope you can do it and i yield back my time. >> the chair recognizes five minutes for myself. i have the privilege and honor of representing a district that is a huge navy presence, so i want to talk about naval aviation. i made daughter of a green beret and had the privilege of serving 10 years as a helicopter pilot and i am married to a veteran and a proud mom. we are the heart of the east coast aviation. yesterday we spent some time talking about the importance of the east coast. i understand the importance of the west coast in this potential china fight we are all thinking of every day, but he cannot be understated the value that are east coast brings. so it is disheartening when i

read about and think about the future of naval aviation when i care from the department of defense at about $500 million that was appropriated for the next generation strike fighter is to be reallocated to the air force, and then when i read memos from this committee this committee is unaware of justifying the procurement and continues to support efforts. we are trying to piece together, and asked the same question yesterday and i echo the comments of my colleague, but that piece is very important. right now i house f-18 squadrons. i have 35 squadron the marine corps is on the west coast, but you will note that putting your eggs in one basket is one of the war strategies. i have the west coast naval station and it looks great.

very excited to have eight f 35 squadrons in the upper center for excellence that went to but there with no mention of the east coast master jet base, so i would hear from y'all. could you explain why that isn't what your plans are to be supportive of our east coast master jet base? >> i think it is a fair point. i think it is equally important. we are reviewing it, no doubt. the budget does provide for completion of the design. as i've stated the program is the party in this budget to get that moving, so we are interested and we do recognize unique power projecting capabilities. the 35 factors in the event also, so we are looking to develop that also and make sure

it is considered. >> that base needs it, and general caine i would love to hear your thoughts as well. we went to talk about dropping bombs in yemen. they show my husband and i get jealous, that is what they show, it is naval aviation. >> thank you for the question and thank you for your service and your husband's service and congratulations to your son that is a big deal. the navy's work on all those issues, is a global innovator having fifth-generation i can get up there and provide deterrence abilities is key. i will get with the navy and take a look at their force a rail in terms of fifth-generation moving forward,

and i defer to leadership on the policy decision. >> i know you are aware of the work we did this last conference for the quality of life and of the structure needs, but the base is hurting and that is our east coast master jet base, and money follows the new toys. please give us your commitment. i have the culture of peace and security august. -- caucus. this is a bill designed to improve military readiness, per my collecting civility through the inclusion of women in peace and security efforts. just please be mindful of that. having been in a lot of meetings with rli partners is a cheap form of maintaining those relationships and really giving a role to the world women want to play.

women are watching, and as a person who was commissioned in 1990 three, which was the first year women could fly in combat it was an important piece of my decision to serve, so i would love to hear thoughts. sec. hegseth: my issue is not what women these insecurity was, it was when it became under the by demonstration. a review shows when it became was not what it should be, and so our decision was to eliminate that. >> my time is expired and the chair recognizes the senator from california. >> i got promoted. thank you to the witnesses for being here. mr. secretary, i just got word that senator padilla was physically assaulted and

arrested for attending secretary noem's press event. the mere fact that he showed up and was forcibly removed. is this how you would treat a member of congress who tended to press event whether invited or not? >> i have been here for five hours, sir. i don't know about that. i am sure there was more context. >> i will take that as a guess. mr. secretary, does the dignity you have any plans to allow the military to follow the orders of president trump when his orders violate the constitution. sec. hegseth: i reject the premise of the question. >> that it women of active-duty marines to california is incredibly disruptive to the lives of service members were being drawn into the president's publicity stunt, and i want to know how you were planning to take care of these troops.

will you commit to sending my office in this committee a detailed plan on how you plan to house and feed potentially thousands of marines? sec. hegseth: what's disruptive is when concrete blocks are thrown at the heads of ice officers, so the national guard and marines have -- >> do you have a plan? sec. hegseth: it has been a focus of mine. i have held a riot shield in a riot. i recognize what it means to respond and real-time. >> would you give me that plan? mr. secretary. l.a. mehr best -- mayor bass said the area with the curfew is one square mile. sec. hegseth: service members art in los angeles to defend ice

age agents and festivities. >> you are developing american people in one square block of l.a., and l.a. county is 4700 warrants that appointment of 700 marines and 4000 national guardsmen. you testified earlier you will send in the military to protect local law enforcement if the lapd police chief asked for your help. sec. hegseth: i read reports from ice agents who could not be more grateful [indiscernible] >> did the l.a. sheriff sq to send in the military, yes or no? sec. hegseth: i don't work for the l.a. sheriff. >> they didn't even ask for your help. have you been to los angeles in the last seven days? sec. hegseth: my team is from

the top down focus on -- >> i will take that as a no. how did you arrive at the decision not to coordinate with local law enforcement and the governor's office on initial deployment? sec. hegseth: it would be great if the governor attempted to coordinate instead of grandstand. >> i believe you were super they deploying troops to an area without coordinating with local officials to the logistical and operational conditions on the ground. do you agree with that? sec. hegseth: i would usually repeat the question. >> does the department plan on correlating with the's office on local law enforcement going forward. sec. hegseth: we have coordinated with local law enforcement quite well, but the governor has been an obstruction to that. sec. hegseth: this political stunt and by your own admission is expected to cost the american taxpayer $134 million and will

disrupt the lives of hundreds and potentially thousands of active-duty marines and debts to the guardsmen. that is thousands of personnel diverted away from critical missions in the in the pacific where china is rapidly expanding from your, where nato needs even support and pretensions -- the redirection of combat ready troops to manage domestic protesters gross mismanagement and deceptive sever the face of service members whose lives are disrupted throughout this event. as a veteran myself, it is a disgrace, and you should be ashamed. >> the children stated it is ok to have one mile of complete criminality in l.a. --

>> that was not my statement. [indiscernible] >> you have not been recognized. >> the chair recognizes the congressman from louisiana for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. let's bring it down a notch. it is always fascinating to see things being talked about. reading scripted, hateful planned rhetoric and directing it at you gentlemen who do indeed know what is to stand opposed.

let me address first for general caine, i have to say that researching your service career, my goodness, ready five years of distinguished, exceptional service. i cannot imagine that there is a better american men to be the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. thank you, good sir. as an enlisted army grunt i think you for where you are under 35 years of service. mr. secretary in general, i have plenty of questions that i do not have to get to because were almost finished with this thing. i have questions on equipment and training and fort polk and software monitoring, shipbuilding. our new army rifles.

but when i met with you when the pentagon a couple of months ago, mr. secretary, we dove deep into the reconciliation considerations and a budget, what the dod would need in the primary threats facing our country. i never really sat down with you like that before, but what struck me was that you are a committed and dedicated patriot, and i know i could expect that transparency and candor. i will get to these questions on the line. i know you will answer the phone, because that is the man you are. you have covered a tremendous amount today, and you will been subjected to some politically motivated vitriol on behalf of

congress. i apologize for that, so let me just state for my humble position on the make a promise to you two gentlemen and by extension the country that we serve. whatever you need to accomplish your mission, we are going to work very hard to provide. may god give you strength and provide shelter protection for your families. you were probably each working 20 hour days every day. thank you for that, for being here today, for your accessibility. i yelled. >> the chair recognizes the

gentleman from virginia. >> i ask unanimous consent to submit for the record any article, a distinguished member of this committee confirmed there was in fact a pause and offensive cyber operations earlier this year. mr. hegseth just denied this. this committee deserves to know whether the secretary just lied. mr. secretary, many people believe you were unqualified for this role. you will been secretary for 4.5 months now. for the sake of our service members i hope you have done your homework since. went year has the navy publicly said as the benchmark for being ready to fight a war with china? sec. hegseth: it needs to be right now. >> there is a set date. sec. hegseth: we would not want to reveal what we think we are ready. >> mr. secretary, i asked for a

year, not a filibuster. 2027 is the year. according to d assessments how many warships does china have minutes work navy today? sec. hegseth: many and growing. >> 370. how many does the u.s. navy have today? sec. hegseth: thanks to this budget -- >> i am looking for a number. sec. hegseth: just south of 300. >> 296, pretty close. how many ships does china plaintiff yield by 2030? sec. hegseth: it was a report that was released. >> 435. let's see if we can do better. what corner of eastern poland is a party and -- a priority for the u.s.?

sec. hegseth: i am sure you can tell me? >> i can tell you. which heavily militarized russian territory connected the gap that contains nuclear capable missiles and threatens all of nato? right there in the middle of eastern europe. sec. hegseth: i see we are playing a quiz game. we are getting our nato allies to step up their spending. >> mr. secretary, i.s. you a specific question. what percentage of ukraine and front-line casualties are caused by feb drones? sec. hegseth: a very large percentage and we are sitting there. >> 70%. --

>> the answer is none of them, so we are not prepared yet. a few weeks ago when my office opened up in fredericksburg i spoke to the mother of one pilot who flew the march 15 mission over the red sea in yemen that you spoke over signal. i asked her if there was anything she wanted me to bring up. she believes you needed to resign and she got several questions, but she said she would appreciate an apology for putting classified information. her son could not tell her where she was going. do you think you owe her an apology? sec. hegseth: please make sure to let her know how grateful we are for the skill and terrorism. >> i am very much grateful and i'm sure that everyone here is grateful. the question is do you owe her an apology for your actions?

sec. hegseth: it was an incredibly successful mission. >> i agree with you, the performance of this pilots and personnel magnificent. we are talking about what you did and accountability. are you going to apologize to the mother or not? sec. hegseth: i don't apologize for success. >> you don't apologize for putting her son up is because life in danger in putting mission in jeopardy. that is really disappointing and not befitting the type of leadership that are troops and families deserve this frankly extending lack of outlook. privates are trained to do better than that. it sounds like accountability does not extend as far as the secretary. i think your ship resigned and the mother once you've gone. >> we recognize the gentleman

from illinois. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you to the secretary and general for joining it -- joining us today. i hope we can come to an agreement that we need both sides of the chair peters -- the chamber working together. do you believe bipartisanship is essential for the mission? sec. hegseth: i think bipartisanship could be a wonderful thing. >> i did not come to congress with political baggage. i believe and my constituents believe we need impartial and bipartisan people to find solutions to complex problems, but today this nation is being pushed and pulled in so many different directions. in constituent this weekend that said i did not even know what to believe anymore. facts do not matter. conspiracy theories run a rabbit like brush fire without it went to them, so i am coping you can shoot straight from the hip with

me. do you have a targeted number of reductions in civilian personnel in our armed forces? sec. hegseth: we have very diligently try to identify the places where we might need to make changes, but for the most part it has been a volunteer process of civilian to try to reduce the number for cost savings? . >> is there analysis? sec. hegseth: we looked at 8% to 10%, but everyone recognizes the dignity civilian size has exploded. a lot of those places and not making us more nimble or faster it will be due. >> what do we say to the people that have struck their entire life, these are former retired members of the military. sec. hegseth: almost all of them took a voluntary drp to separate. >> do you have a timeline for

making those cuts? sec. hegseth: almost all of them were volunteers who decided to retire early. >> i learned a lot about military service from both of my grandpa's who served and fought in world war ii. my grandfather was a proud nifty photographer. i learned to be proud of him, and from him i learned how to become proud of veterans, which is why i went to talk about a different veteran, who served in the korean war. he served courageously like my grandpa, but unlike my grandpa this veteran was forced to resign from the navy. i am talking about harvey milk, because he was gay. as a kid all i wanted to be was the weatherman on tv. i learned i could've gone into the army and navy, but someone

like me it was not allowed. they didn't want someone like me. there was not anything i could do to change myself or the way that my nation thought of me, so i went to keep this very simple. do you believe that harvey milk is a veteran who deserves this country's thanks? sec. hegseth: the decision to rename the ship was -- >> do you believe harvey milk is a veteran who deserves his country's thanks, yes or no? sec. hegseth: if his service was deemed audible, yes. >> yesterday the secretary was in your seat. i disagree with her leadership enters because i believe every veteran deserves our thanks. we all walk in the foot ship -- footsteps of leaders. --

you may want to change it, but you cannot, because the america that you and i both serve as a place where everybody should have the ability to grow up and be the hero there grandpa was. i wanted to do that when i was a kid. gay kids like me do not want to go into the army, the navy, because we do not care for them. it is happening all over our country. my grandpa taught me never to judge the value of a veteran of us, and i hope, mr. secretary you hope to do the same in your capacity, and you can find it in your heart to make that part of your process. may god continue to watch over our troops and military families. >> the chair recognizes that jim

from missouri. -- gettleman from missouri. >> i do not feel sorry for you. i have visited with soldiers in war zones whose life was on the line, so a few tough questions. i think you will be ok. my first question is are you authorized to disclose intelligence that would put our troops in harm's way to our enemies? sec. hegseth: i reject the premise. >> are you authorized to do that? sec. hegseth: i have not and do not. >> so when you told the ranking member that everything you say it was authorized that that was not, right? sec. hegseth: what i said is every way i can indicate -- >> you actually said everything that you say is authorized. i wrote it down. i bring that up because it is about accountability.

we are talking about this word eat those. -- ethos. the primary accountability. republicans introduced a bill, resolution standing against terrorism, eight, -- hate, racism. as a blackman i will stand against the things six times a week and twice on sunday. there was a line that give a shout to law enforcement, but also to ice, and a lot of americans have a problem with with it ice is being deployed. i am not happy with what they're doing nor do i want to shut them out. i went and i talked to my constituents. i went on social media, did

interviews to explain where i stood, that i stand against hate , anti-semitism, racism. when we are asking you these questions and you were not answering them directly, that is not a culture of -- what was the term, a warrior ethos. i am looking at members who served, and they are taking their lead from you. that starts with you, and if we have troops in war zones, and they are watching and you cannot answer some tough questions, what kind of culture is that setting? so as a prosecutor when i think about what is happening in california and around the country with ice, it is not only

dangerous and unconstitutional, but it raises serious safety concerns because we have people going around in a masks -- people saying that they are that in committing crimes, and that is a problem. it gets me back to the point of the accountability piece. if you believe quality as it important, yes or no? sec. hegseth: our budget commits to robust military housing. >> do you believe military children deserve a strong education? sec. hegseth: our budget promote strong education and more military choices. >> it is porton -- is it important to provide care for our veterans? sec. hegseth: yes. >> we have a problem because your budget is a major priorities. you said your mission is to resort this warrior ethos and threats we face are serious.

when we think of a 45 million dollars parade, i can think of 45 million things we can do or effectively than operate. military housing, military children's education, providing reliable care for our veterans. all of these things would be higher on priority than operate. when we talk about showing strength, we are not talking about fear, and showmanship. we are talking about things that make our military or legal innkeeper safer. -- and keeping a safer. accountability does matter, and this body does care about what

our military is doing. we ticket syriza. >> -- take it seriously. >> all time for questions has expired. >> i want to think the chairman for leadership. the other side's risk outrage. the savage attacks on secretary austin and chairman millie, it was alarming to behold. let me agree with what mr. bill just said, tough job. part of it is you are accountable to this body and you are accountable to answer questions, even if sometimes they are obnoxious.

that is part of the gig, and i do hope going forward the department of defense will have greater contact with this committee. i have not spoken to you one in the entire time you have been secretary of defense. i have been through a ton of secretaries of defense that's serve presidents including president trump. always had a good relationship and conversation. the department is cutting us off in a weight that is not helpful to bipartisan elves that have been expressed by the other side of the aisle. you will been very generous and we shall. i've had good communication i appreciate that, because that is the responsibility get the job. i have not meant to many people at the pentagon don't like coming over there, but it is part of the job. we are the people's voice and charged with conducting oversight.

criticism is part of the gig. i think the chairman for conducting any excellent hearing. >> mr. mcdonald, you christian today. -- crushed it today. [laughter] [applause] thank you for your first appearance. thank you for your service to our country, and with that we are adjourned. [indiscernible chatter] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] ♪ >> joined c-span for them for coverage of the u.s. army's 250th anniversary parade and celebration saturday from washington, d.c. commemorating june 14, 1775, that is directed when the continental congress established the continental army and laid the foundation for america's national military first. witness a tribute the army's evolution from the revolution awarded today with over 2000 soldiers in period and modern uniforms marching along the national mall. it will feature aerial flyover sent a timeline of u.s. army history. the celebration continues with the ceremonial enlistment and reenlistment featuring present from, dramatic parachute jumps, a live concert and a finale with fireworks. watch about 250th army parade

and celebration, c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. ♪ >> this show and c-span is one of the few places left in america where you actually have left and right coming together to talk, and you guys do a great service and that. >> i love c-span too. >> sometimes i get to do fun things like a one c-span. >> c-span is one of the few places americans can still go. >> c-span has such a distinguished and audible and important mandate admission. >> this is my favorite show, because i get to cure with the american people care about. >> american people have access to the government it weighs they did not before the cable industry provided c-span access.

>> this is one of the last places where people are actually having conversations, even people who disagree. >> it shows you could have a television network that can try to be objective. >> thank you c-span for all you do. >> it does bring people together. we are the questions are asked and people have to answer to them. ♪ ions on privacy and national security, the senate judiciary committee hearing is an hour and 40 minutes.