Pete Hegseth was confirmed as Donald Trump's Secretary of Defense on Friday evening, ending one of the more contentious confirmation processes the newly reelected president will face. Because Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Susan Collins (R-ME) voted no on Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance was forced to go to the Capitol and break the tie.
SEE: BREAKING: US Senate Votes on Pete Hegseth Nomination for Defense Secretary
Days before the vote, Danielle Hegseth, who is the ex-wife of Pete Hegseth's brother, came forward to accuse the new head of the Pentagon of domestic abuse. In an affidavit, she claimed Samantha Hegseth "feared for her life," and once had to hide in a closet to escape Pete Hegseth's wrath. The problem? Samantha Hegseth, who was the person supposedly abused, categorically denied the allegations and threatened to get her lawyer involved.
SEE: Press Outlets Accuse Pete Hegseth of Domestic Abuse, but His Ex-Wife Nukes Them
With the confirmation vote in the books, Danielle Hegseth has responded, and while parts of her statement are not surprising, something very interesting is buried in it.
Let's deal with the obvious first. I can not with absolute certainty claim to know exactly what Pete Hegseth has or has not done in his past. What I do know is that when Democrats trotted out Christine Blasey Ford to try to scuttle Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation, the game changed completely. There was a time when unproven allegations could be devastating to a nominee. That ended the moment the Democratic Party tried to weaponize Ford's farcical tale to undermine the entire process.
In the case of Pete Hegseth, not only was there no actual evidence provided by Danielle Hegseth, but the person who was allegedly abused said it never happened. At that point, nothing in that affidavit was relevant. You can't have nominees losing their confirmations based on third-party claims that aren't even supported by the alleged victim. Whether that means some people who once did bad things make it through or not is irrelevant. You simply can't have a functioning government if the mere existence of an allegation, especially one thoroughly denied by the most relevant party, is allowed to dictate the process.
With that said, this was the most illuminating part of her statement:
"A week ago, I was promised that my statement, on the record, would corroborate the other accusations and make a difference in key votes. But in the end, it did not."
Hang on a second. Who "promised" this woman that her statement would "corroborate the other accusations and make a difference in key votes"? It's assumed she was interviewed by the FBI as part of the background check. Did an agent tell her that? I would hope not given it is not the place of the FBI to have a rooting interest in whether a cabinet member is confirmed or not.
It's possible, but I tend to think that's the least likely explanation. Instead, you can bet that Danielle Hegseth was working with one or more Democrat senators just as Christine Blasey Ford was. That alone calls into question the credibility of her testimony, especially since she was "promised" something in exchange for it. You can also bet the information about the affidavit was leaked to the press by the Democrats as well. This was the Kavanaugh playbook all over again.
I'm sure I'm not alone, but I'd very much like to know who Danielle Hegseth was working with. At this point, Democrats trying to overcome their lack of winning elections by leaking allegations has become expected, and we need names.
[Editor's Note: This article was edited for clarity after publication.]
Join the conversation as a VIP Member