'You're an embarrassment": Carbajal demands Hegseth's resignation over dodged questions
The heated exchange between Rep. Salud Carbajal, D-Calif., and Hegseth came after the head of the Pentagon dodged a number of questions from members of the House Armed Services Committee on Thursday.
Hegseth had already evaded inquiries about the deployment of troops to Los Angeles and the possibility of plans on invading Greenland and Panama. When Carbajal asked Hegseth if serving in the Trump admin required a loyalty test, Hegseth pushed the representative over the edge when he avoided a direct answer and called the question 'silly.'
'I'm not going to waste my time anymore,' Carbajal said. 'You're not worthy of my attention or my questions. You're an embarrassment to this country. You're unfit to lead, and there's been bipartisan members of Congress that have called for your resignation. You should just get the hell out and let somebody competently lead this department.'
https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1933189654464930024
On Thursday, Hegseth was grilled by lawmakers about the Trump administration's decision to deploy the California National Guard and several hundred Marines to Los Angeles. That deployment has been challenged in court by California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., asked Hegseth if he would abide by a court's ruling in that suit.
"Can you assure the American people of two things: you will respect any Supreme Court decision on this matter about whether the Marines are constitutional, and you will respect the district courts when they rule before the Supreme Court rules?' she asked.
Hegseth balked.
'What I can say is we should not have local judges determining foreign policy or national security policy for the country,' he said.
Also on Thursday, Hegseth puzzled Democrats and Republicans when he failed to definitively answer questions about whether the administration intends to invade Greenland and Panama. Instead of offering a clear answer, Hegseth repeatedly said the Pentagon has 'plans' for various scenarios.
'Any contingency you need, we've got it. We've got a building full of planners, and we're prepared to give recommendations whenever needed,' Hegseth said.
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1933174746075558228
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
10 minutes ago
- Axios
How Trump is making pot a MAGA issue
President Trump is opening the door to reclassifying marijuana, potentially allowing the GOP to claim another health issue that's long been associated with Democrats. Why it matters: The administration has already flipped the political script when it comes to banning food dyes, calling for an end to animal lab testing and embracing psychedelics for mental health. Rescheduling marijuana could be a big step toward establishing an interstate cannabis trade — and turning a policy long sought by congressional Democrats and promoted by the Biden administration into reality. Driving the news: Trump brought up the subject during a recent event with donors at his Bedminster, New Jersey, country club after marijuana companies contributed millions of dollars to his political organizations, the Wall Street Journal first reported. While falling short of legalization, designating pot to have medical value and less dangerous than its Schedule I designation would be a major jolt to cannabis companies that run on thin margins, per Axios' Dan Primack. It would allow them to deduct business expenses on their taxes and also reduce restrictions on cannabis research. The industry has mounted"a very powerful PR effort," Kevin Sabet, founder of Smart Approaches to Marijuana who served in the White House Office of Drug Control Policy under three administrations, told Axios. "They've spent hundreds of millions of dollars in total to influence the president from Florida onward, whether it's inauguration, whether it's million-dollar-plate fundraisers in New Jersey. They are going all out because they want this tax break." Catch up quick: Polling from the Pew Research Center and others have shown increasing support for marijuana legalization across the political spectrum, with 88% favoring medical or recreational use. "Cannabis has become a less partisan [issue] over time, and this has been accelerated by the proliferation of intoxicating hemp products," Beau Kilmer, co-director of the RAND Drug Policy Research Center, told Axios. "Heck, I was just in Indiana where someone could buy THC drinks in grocery stores and bars — I don't even see that here in California." While much of Trump's orbit has been more circumspect about making such a change, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a notable exception, Sabet said. Kennedy supported legalization of marijuana during his presidential campaign and said it could open up more research into risks and benefits, although he has also warned about potential "catastrophic impacts" on users. There's still a big difference between rescheduling a drug and federal legalization, which demonstrates the political winds of change are moving slowly. Multiple state ballot initiatives seeking to legalize recreational pot have failed over the last several years. Trump, like Biden, is a teetotaler, and neither has expressed great enthusiasm for legalization over the years, said Jonathan Caulkins, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University. "The way to think about it is some people wanted Biden to legalize. Biden didn't want to do that, so he said, 'Well, I'll suggest rescheduling, which will make some people think that we've made a big change, but it isn't really,'" Caulkins said. Friction point: The rescheduling of marijuana means the government would be officially recognizing its medicinal uses. That's difficult when the quality and consistency of the botanical version of the drug isn't like more conventional pharmaceuticals, Caulkins said. The move also would transfer cannabis to the purview of the Food and Drug Administration, which could create headaches for the agency. The FDA would be "between a rock and a hard place," Caulkins said. "They either have to ignore their own rules and regulations and say, we're just going to let the cannabis happen without the usual standards for medicine, or we're going to bite the bullet and crack down on a multibillion-dollar industry that's been operating for years now." The big picture: A rescheduling would be further evidence of the MAGA world's ability to take the reins on issues once associated with the progressive movement. "For the left, it's been much more about sort of social justice and righting the wrongs of the drug war," Sabet said. On the other hand: "You have part of the MAGA wing that has embraced this," he said. "It's about business, it's about money." Yes, but: This is already stirring up some disagreement among Trump's base. "I hope this doesn't happen," Turning Point USA founder and key MAGA influencer Charlie Kirk posted on X. "Everything already smells like weed, which is ridiculous. Let's make it harder to ruin public spaces, not easier." Relaxing marijuana rules also is stirring concern among state GOP lawmakers in states like Ohio, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Even administration officials such as FDA commissioner Marty Makary have posted warnings about health risks from cannabis use. Reality check: Trump was vague on the timing of any move when he confirmed the WSJ's reporting on Monday, saying: "We're only looking at that. It's early."
Newsweek
12 minutes ago
- Newsweek
White House Launches Smithsonian Review To 'Ensure Alignment'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The White House has announced a review of some Smithsonian Institution museums to "ensure alignment" with President Donald Trump's goals. Newsweek has contacted the Smithsonian for comment via email outside regular working hours. Why It Matters In March, Trump signed an executive order, titled "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History," to eliminate what his administration described as "improper ideology" across all branches of the Smithsonian—including its museums, research centers, educational initiatives and the National Zoo. The move sparked backlash online and from museum volunteers. In July, the Smithsonian National Museum of American History removed references to Trump's two impeachments from its exhibit on presidential impeachments, prompting a debate about historical accuracy and political influence on public institutions. A Smithsonian Institution sign on the National Air and Space Museum on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on March 28. A Smithsonian Institution sign on the National Air and Space Museum on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on March To Know A letter dated August 12 and addressed to Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie Bunch said the White House would be leading "a comprehensive internal review of selected Smithsonian museums and exhibitions." According to the letter, the review is timed to coincide with next year's celebrations of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence being signed. The letter described the review as a "constructive and collaborative effort," adding that it would focus on key areas such as public-facing content, the curatorial process, exhibition planning, collection use and narrative standards. The letter also said the initial review would focus on the following museums: National Museum of American History, National Museum of Natural History, National Museum of African American History and Culture, National Museum of the American Indian, National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian American Art Museum, National Portrait Gallery, and Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden. These are not the only museums being reviewed. The letter said additional museums would be reviewed in "Phase II." While the Smithsonian is independent of the government, it receives funding from Congress. As with Trump's March executive order, the review has received backlash online. Some social media users have raised concerns about the level of government intervention with the museums. What People Are Saying The White House's letter to the Smithsonian said: "This initiative aims to ensure alignment with the President's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions." President Donald Trump wrote in his March executive order: "Museums in our Nation's capital should be places where individuals go to learn—not to be subjected to ideological indoctrination or divisive narratives that distort our shared history. To advance this policy, we will restore the Smithsonian Institution to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness." Karly Kingsley, a media personality, wrote on X in a post viewed more than 200,000 times: "We're suspending the jobs report so you don't see how bad the numbers are, auditing the Smithsonian to match Trump's politics, fighting over gerrymandering the map, and deploying the military into cities. This isn't governance anymore. It's authoritarianism in plain sight." Journalist Dan Friedman wrote on X in a post viewed more than 40,000 times: "The White House pressuring the Smithsonian to 'eliminate political influence' from its presentation of history is some freaky Orwellian s***." What Happens Next The letter includes a 30-, 75- and 120-day implementation timeline. By the 120-day mark, "museums should begin implementing content corrections where necessary, replacing divisive or ideologically driven language with unifying, historically accurate, and constructive descriptions across placards, wall didactics, digital displays, and other public-facing materials."
Axios
40 minutes ago
- Axios
What investors see in the sale of AI chips to China
Nvidia and AMD can sell their AI chips to China for the low price of 15% of their revenue, paid out to the U.S. government. Investors are unfazed. Why it matters: Shareholders are focusing on the revenue opportunities that come with more access to Beijing, not on the unprecedented involvement of the Trump administration in Nvidia's business dealings. What they're saying: "There's way more upside," Daniel Newman, principal analyst and CEO of The Futurum Group, tells Axios. Catch up quick: The Trump administration previously backed export controls on Nvidia's H20 chips, which are "orders of magnitude" less powerful than Nvidia's Blackwell chips, Newman says. A month ago, the administration signaled that it was shifting course on these controls, but did not issue the licenses required for sales to be possible. That appeared to change after Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang met with President Trump. Nvidia walked away with promises of licenses so long as the chip giant cut the U.S. government a check for 15% of its China revenue. Zoom in: Nvidia stock is up nearly 0.5% since the news broke Monday, with investors and analysts bullish on the deal. The lifting of the export controls could lead to a $15 billion revenue windfall for Nvidia. Both Nvidia and AMD have pricing power, given the strength of demand for AI chips in China, according to a note from Bank of America. That means the 15% expense could be passed on to Chinese customers. Between the lines: While the deal could lead to billions of dollars in additional revenue for the U.S. government, it's not just about the money. It's also about access to rare earth magnets, Newman says. The U.S. has powerful AI chips that China wants. China has rare earth metals the U.S. wants. When the administration first changed course on export controls in July, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CNBC that selling the "fourth best" AI chip to China wasn't material. Lutnick also said the export control rollback was tied to a rare earths deal, though those details have not fully materialized. Yes. but: Export controls are typically put in place for a reason: in this case, national security concerns. The 15% revenue split, first reported by the Financial Times, includes an anonymous source quote that points to the security concerns: "What's next — letting Lockheed Martin sell F-35s to China for a 15% commission?" Situational awareness: Beijing is urging local companies to avoid buying chips from American companies because of its own security concerns. Newman says that may be political theater – an effort for China to keep the upper hand in ongoing negotiations. Chinese companies will likely still want access to the best possible chips. Be smart: In just January of this year, investors feared China outpacing the U.S. in the AI arms race given the reported success of DeepSeek.
