Michigan Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin defined why she voted in opposition to confirming Pete Hegseth as secretary of protection on ABC Information’ “This Week” on Sunday, saying she had not been assured Hegseth could be extra loyal to the Structure than he could be to President Donald Trump..
Hegseth, a former Fox Information host, was sworn into the position on Saturday following a razor-thin vote within the Senate.
Slotkin, who joined the Senate in January and beforehand labored for a number of nationwide safety companies, together with the Division of Protection, advised “This Week” co-anchor Martha Raddatz that it was essential in affirmation hearings that nominees knew they had been “elevating your proper hand and pledging an oath to the Structure — not Donald Trump — and that if Donald Trump asks you to do one thing that contravenes the Structure, you’d push again.”
Sen. Elissa Slotkin seems on “This Week,” Jan. 26, 2025.
ABC Information
“He could not unambiguously say that he’ll push again if the president requested him to do one thing that wasn’t constitutional, and that, to me, is why I could not affirm him,” Slotkin mentioned. “There’s a variety of different issues in his background I do not like, however I have a look at what’s the strategic and irreversible threats to our democracy, and that is utilizing the uniform navy in ways in which violate the Structure.”
The vote to substantiate Hegseth was initially 50-50 till Vice President JD Vance, in his position as president of the Senate, solid the tie-breaking vote. Each Democrat voted in opposition to Hegseth’s affirmation, as did Republican Sens. Mitch McConnell, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.
His nomination course of was marred by accusations of sexual misconduct, extreme ingesting and monetary mismanagement of two totally different veterans organizations. He has denied all of the allegations.
Throughout Hegseth’s affirmation listening to, Slotkin questioned him on whether or not he helps active-duty navy members supporting immigrant detention facilities if ordered to take action by Trump. With 1,500 troopers and Marines now at or deploying to the border, Slotkin burdened on “This Week” that the navy shouldn’t tackle a regulation enforcement position on this new mission.
“Based on our Structure, you may go in supporting roles — logistics, driving, organising amenities, organising, , border places, no matter — it’s extremely totally different while you cross the road into regulation enforcement,” she mentioned. “Our navy should not educated as regulation enforcement officers — they’re going to be the primary one to let you know that. That is not why they obtained into service, and it is also in violation of our Structure, so I feel it is crucial that we maintain that line.”
Slotkin mentioned it was essential to know “you are not going to make use of the uniform navy in ways in which violates the Structure and makes Americans petrified of their very own navy.”
“We had been petrified of the British once they occupied us,” she mentioned. “We do not need to repeat that, so I am watching that very, very carefully.”
Slotkin additionally spoke about Tulsi Gabbard’s upcoming affirmation listening to for the position of director of nationwide intelligence. Slotkin was one of many first workers within the director’s workplace, working there between 2005 and 2006 in between stints on the CIA as an analyst.
“I served with Tulsi Gabbard. We had been on the Armed Companies Committee collectively. She did not spend a variety of time displaying as much as hearings, so I did not get to see her in motion all that a lot,” Slotkin mentioned. “However from what I perceive from individuals who have been assembly immediately along with her — and he or she hasn’t requested to satisfy with me — is that she does not present the competence, the understanding, the depth. She wasn’t ready for her conferences, to not point out the deeply questionable choices she’s manufactured from cozying as much as [Russian President] Vladimir Putin, flying and cozying up with Assad in Syria.”
Slotkin mentioned she does “not consider [Gabbard] is certified for this position.”
“You already know, having somebody accountable for our intelligence group that exhibits a choice for our adversaries, to me, is good off the bat, a deep query,” Slotkin mentioned. “And so once more, I hope that my colleagues on the opposite facet of the aisle who now have management of the Senate, management of the Home, that they give thought to, once more, their dedication to the nation, to not anybody get together.”
Gabbard’s affirmation listening to is scheduled for Thursday earlier than the Senate Intelligence Committee.
